News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Since the Supreme Court is full of Originalists now, let's think the way the farmers would have thought. When they wrote "lifetime appointments" into the Constitution, the average life expectancy for a male child at birth was 35 years. But that counts a lot of infant and child deaths, not to mention deaths due to military service. A man who managed to make it to 50 years old in 1789 would probably have at least 21 years left. Source
So, all lifetime appointments should be forced to retire at 71, because that's how long a lifetime appointment in 1789 would have lasted. Hey, Clarence, will you go along with my thorough analysis if I give you a "gratuity" afterwards?
Ok, let's say 80.
"Yet the average lifespan of the 56 signers to the Declaration of Independence was 66 years, and a quarter of them (including Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, and Ben Franklin) lived to 80 or older."
https://populationeducation.org/sites/default/files/resource_files/SSYL%20article%20Jan%202013%20-%20Life%20Expectancy.pdf
The average age of the signers, when they signed the DOI, was something like 26 or some really young age. Washington was practically venerable at like 40 or 45.
I don't think your example portrays originalism. They could have said "Until they reach the age of average life expectancy" then but instead went with life time appointments when in good behavior. A lifetime being serving until that judge dies, unless they've given up their seat.
To change lifetime appointments we'd need a constitutional amendment.
Your using logic and facts to drive your conclusions, though. You're supposed to do it the other way around: start with your conclusion, and cherry-pick facts to reach it. Once you learn that, you, too can be a Conservate SC Justice!
Your example is actually much closer to Living Constitutionalism which based on this comment I'm going to assume you probably don't want to be criticizing.
Originalism is tethered to textualism which is antithetical to your analogy reading words out of text.