Debate: should supreme court justices have term limits? pro: they should have term limits.

can someone me with what is stated in the image, also if u can include websites on where to find the information in this message.

The Supreme Court Justices appointed to such position, have the chance to be in the highest Court in the land for their entire lifetime; meaning that they will work as Supreme Court Justices until they die, retire, go thru impeachment or resign. William O. Douglas had the longest tenure in the history of the Supreme Court, consisting of 36 years, from 1939 to 1975; followed by Stephen Johnson Field, who served in the Supreme Court from 1863 to 1897, serving a total of 34 years. The list goes on and on; Justices can stay a very long time in their seats. The unfortunate truth; being in the Supreme Court bubble for too long can have negative effects in the points of views of Justices. According to John Roberts, he said back in 1983 that longer and longer terms can lose touch with the world outside the court. He stated that ¨setting a term of, say 15 years would ensure that federal judges would not lose all touch with reality through decades of ivory tower existence. ¨  

The thought that Supreme Court Justices can lose the sense of the real world is concerning. The responsibilities that come with the job they have are great. The future of million Americans depends on them, and to think that they can lose touch with the reality that is shared by the vast majority of Americans is heart aching.  

Under these circumstances, it has to be understood that the Supreme Court is the highest U.S court, and decisions that Justices make are both final, and cause a deep impact in every life in this country. It goes from abortion to Rump´s ban on travel from certain countries and even labor unions. The President has the right to propose who can possibly occupy such position; however, the untimely recent events just told, give the current President, two opportunities to fill in the seats with conservative-minded Justices, who can make decisions that negatively change the lives of a lot of Americans.  

Having realized that one person can profoundly impact every single American, is worthy of giving it a second look. Maybe term limits –the the one Presidents have –can be a good idea after all. Setting term limits for Supreme Court Justices is the best action to make, according to the data shown in this investigation. Along with John Robert´s statement, The Economist Magazine also states that making the Supreme Court more versatile, it can be a positive turnover; it would make it more responsive to social conflicts or specific cases where the sense of reality can be the difference between making the best decision and worst in someone’s life. To be the cause or effect.  

Seeking a term limits for the Supreme Court Justice is not undermining American strength or democracy, but rather a step to make a more perfect union. This was the vision of our founding fathers, without any doubt. There are proposals of shortening the tenure to 10, 12 or 18 years. Unexpected departures for one would not be much of a problem with term limits, since the government would have a clear idea of when a seat in the Supreme Court would need replacement.  

In conclusion, giving timeless power to one person, is not the best of ideas. As a democracy, America cannot allow such thing. Furthermore, the evidence shown by different media outposts explicitly explains that there is no direct benefit of having a life time seat in the Supreme Court. Justices should make the highest Court in the land more responsive to sensitive issues regarding the American society.