Skip to main content
edited tags
Link
divibisan
  • 26k
  • 6
  • 112
  • 135
added 13 characters in body
Source Link
Federico
  • 6.7k
  • 4
  • 36
  • 58

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years, single-term)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

What has been the political discussion/process that has brought the US to the current rather than other processes?

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

What has been the political discussion/process that has brought the US to the current rather than other processes?

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years, single-term)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

What has been the political discussion/process that has brought the US to the current rather than other processes?

Tweeted twitter.com/StackPolitics/status/1042020802248560641
deleted 26 characters in body
Source Link
Federico
  • 6.7k
  • 4
  • 36
  • 58

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

Why hasn't a similar solution been adopted in the US? What has been the political discussion/process that has brought the US to the current statusrather than other processes?

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

Why hasn't a similar solution been adopted in the US? What has been the political discussion/process that has brought to the current status?

Sorry for the non-descriptive title, but while I was typing a more descriptive one I realized it was going to be overly long.

My understanding of the USSC appointments is that

  • they are for life
  • only the US President can appoint a new member
  • only the Senate can confirm the appointments

and this comes from the US Constitution.

As a comparison, I have the Italian top Constitutional Court

  • appointments are with a term (9 years)
  • to maintain balance within the three branches of government, each branch appoints a third of the members (with the President being part of the Executive branch)

This also is detailed in the Italian Constitution.

What has been the political discussion/process that has brought the US to the current rather than other processes?

Source Link
Federico
  • 6.7k
  • 4
  • 36
  • 58
Loading