Page 2 - Lifetime Terms News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

Should reconsider that? this idea of expanding the supreme court? >> i think -- look, i -- i'm probably more of a traditionalist than many. i find myself today thinking what do you do -- i quite frankly do believe that we were led by supreme court justices. we had two united state senators who voted for them and would not have been confirmed if they had not voted for them or didn't feel that the truth was told to them. i think we really need to study what are the options. we need to look at do we continue to have lifetime terms? i also think -- i've been someone that's been reluctant on the fi...

Them. once they are in place they're insulated and serve lifetime terms. when you move to change the composition of the court not because there aren't enough personel to handle the job but to change the political outcome of the decisions they may you reverse the central feature that makes our court system valuable. >> bill: justice barrett talked about judicial philosophy. why do you think she felt compelled to offer that opinion? >> well, it's correct and it is also one of the most misunderstood features of the supreme court. very often people assume when looking at the supreme court that eve...

From the judge. this judge has been on the bench for long time. you know, judges, look, they have lifetime terms for a reason. to make them insulated from political pressure and lack of accountability. i think largely we like that, but there are always down sides that come with the good sides. you see some judges that have this arrogant approach in the courtroom and you hear from people who practice in that court that judge ellis is like that in a lot of cases, but he's also a judge that i think when reporters are in the room and high profile and likes to show off a little bit for the press an...

Step. it's different from what judge hudson did in virginia, who found the individual mandate unconstitutional. but only invol dated that part -- invalidated that part of the law. if this is upheld and the judge's ruling is upheld, everything about pre-existing conditions, about keeping kids on their parents' insurance until they're 26, all that goes out the window. even though that's not unconstitutional. that, i think, is -- is an enormous victory for opponents of the law. i think that part of the law is probably unlikely to stand appellate review. >> so help the cynic in me out here. we bel...