Perhaps. But a few points. Judges don’t go back into court to litigate. I worry that this court be seen as an attack on the judiciary. I know many judges. They are all good people. So Maybe we should focus on the politicians who seek to use judges as weapons?
https://twitter.com/honickman/status/1104522061228195842
The use of judges by politicians for opinions and the constant political suggestion of referring sticky issues to the court for an opinion is bad. But I think the solution of limiting work judges do after retiring is bad bad bad for a number of reasons.
1. Limits judge pool. I ain’t applying if I am put out to pasture after.
2. Good luck drafting that rule - what about international work, charities, teaching, running of office, writing....
3. Pensions are not generous because limiting future employment is contemplated...
2. Good luck drafting that rule - what about international work, charities, teaching, running of office, writing....
3. Pensions are not generous because limiting future employment is contemplated...
4. Unconstitutional?
5. May encourage ossification of the judiciary. I like not having a bench full of 75 year old judges. Limiting work after retirement may encourage older benches.
6. The politicians who are misbehaving will find other ways to misbehave.
5. May encourage ossification of the judiciary. I like not having a bench full of 75 year old judges. Limiting work after retirement may encourage older benches.
6. The politicians who are misbehaving will find other ways to misbehave.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
