F-1

AFF
Term limits would limit surprises and would promote fairness.
Vox June 27 2018 https://www.vox.com/polyarchy/2018/6/27/17511030/supreme-court-term-limits-retirement
For one, it would significantly decrease the likelihood of another unexpected departure, like the one
caused by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death almost a year ago now. Scalia was appointed in 1986. He would have been term-limited out long
before his passing. In
these partisan times, justices are staying on the bench longer, not wanting to
leave unless they can be replaced in a political environment that ensures a replacement on
the same side. Which makes them more likely to die on the bench. Moreover, if justices were staggered in their terms, everyone in
Washington would know they’d have another opportunity to change the Court again soon enough. This regularity could also
move toward more of a norm of fair play.

Supreme Court is inherently based on just luck and is inherently undemocratic.

NY Times September 18 2018 https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/18/opinion/columnists/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-
term-limits.html

For one, our system often does not respect the will of the people. Rather than the Supreme Court’s makeup
being determined by elections over many years, it’s based on a combination of those elections and the
randomness of how long justices live. Jimmy Carter was unable to make a single nomination
to the court because no justice died or retired during his four-year presidency. Richard Nixon
filled four seats during his five-and-a-half years as president. “The policy future of the country,” Norm Ornstein
of the American Enterprise Institute has written, “depends as much on the actuarial tables and the luck of the draw for presidents as it does on
the larger trends in politics and society.”

The current supreme court setup only promotes intense partisan battles and creates a
divided government.
CATO Institute October 5 2018 https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/save-supreme-court-impose-term-limits-
justices

The poison of vicious political partisanship infects virtually every aspect of policy today.
Judicial appointments, which a couple decades ago resulted in overwhelming votes for well-
qualified nominees, have turned into brutal battles with no prisoners taken . Not only has the fight over
the Kavanaugh nomination devolved into a mud wrestling match. Congressional Democrats are now threatening to continue the battle if Brett
Kavanaugh is confirmed, possibly pushing to impeach the new justice if they win control in November. That would cause the GOP to retaliate,
as it did when it ended the filibuster against judicial appointments.
NEG