Ruth Bader Ginsburg and the US Supreme Court



What happens when a Supreme Court Justice is not dead but because of some medical disability can no longer discharge the duties demanded of the Office of Supreme Court Justice?  Well, that already happened, it happened to Justice William O. Douglas.  Douglas had a stroke in 1974 at the age of 76, and refused to retire despite a resulting disability.  Seven of the other justices voted to defer to the next term any decision in which Douglas’ vote would make the difference.  Douglas did not retire for almost a year despite urging from other justices.  After retirement Justice William O. Douglas tried to serve in a senior judicial status, but the other justices refused to cooperate.  Douglas’ long and distinguished career was partially marred by his hanging on when he could no longer function effectively.  Yet there was nothing the President, Congress, or other justices could do to force him to retire.
If we ever reformed the Supreme Court by constitutional amendment it would be a good thing to add some provision for dealing with this kind of situation as now we are faced with similar circumstances pondering the ill health and associated concerns about Ruth Bader Ginsburg. What that provision should be is up for debate.
What does the United States Constitution say about retirement for U.S. Supreme Court Justices?  Retirement at this point is voluntary, there is no maximum age to retire (forced retirement is mandatory in all other branches of Government Service).  Supreme Court associate justices who decide to retire at age 70, after 10 years on the job, or at age 65 with 15 years of service is eligible to receive their full highest salary – usually their salary at retirement for the rest of their lives.  In return for this lifetime pension, judges who retire in relatively good health with no disabilities are required to remain active in the legal community, performing a minimum specified amount of judicial obligations every year.
Retirement for Supreme Court justices at full salary in the Judiciary Act of 1869, the same law that settled the number of justices at nine. Congress felt that since Supreme Court justices, like all federal judges, are well paid and appointed for life; a lifetime pension at full salary would encourage judges to retire rather than attempting to serve during extended periods of poor health and potential senility. Indeed, fear of death and decreased mental capacity are often cited as motivating factors in judges' decisions to retire.
While bodies may wither, or fall ill, with age, the mind can remain good. Mental incapacity is the problem.  Good health is not always easy to discern, even in younger justices, and no institution in government is more secretive than the Supreme Court, particularly about the health of the justices.
While media coverage of the Supreme Court is greater than it has ever been, making it far more difficult for justices to keep secret their ill heath, often the reporters who cover the Court do not report these facts even if they learn them.  They want to remain in the Justices' good graces.
The key here is Congress.  If the Congress flexed a little muscle, it could no doubt get the Supreme Court to voluntarily provide all justices' health information on a regular basis to a select joint committee of the House and Senate.  Such an informal check on the Court could give the public some assurances that law clerks are not running an incapacitated justice's office. Besides, editorials urging that a particular Justice should resign might have some persuasive effect — for the justice would know from them that his or her remaining on the Court would tarnish the court’s image.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg is currently 84 years old and has set upon the United States Supreme Court as Associate Justice since appointed by President Clinton appointed her Associate Justice in 1993.  Ginsburg has served well past her requirement to make her eligible to draw full time retirement form the bench with only the proviso that she maintains a minimum of activity in the legal community.  I say it is up to us to make a decision to force congress to make a constitutional amendment for mandatory retirement of US Supreme Court Justices or force the US Supreme Court to police their own.

Comments