Constitutional Question

[Lincoln Republican]

This is a constitutional question regarding nobody in particular, and is co0mpletely theoretical.

Let us suppose that an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court is hospitalized, and while in hospital lapses into a coma.

This individual is therefore not able to resign from the bench on their own volition, and of course is physically incapable of participating in court cases.

What happens in such a scenario?

Is there a provision in the constitution covering such an event? 

Please advise and discuss.

[brucejoel99]

In 1991, writing for a majority of the Court in Gregory v. Ashcroft, which addressed the constitutionality of a Missouri law requiring the states' judges & justices to retire at age 70, Sandra Day O'Connor wrote: "It is an unfortunate fact of life that physical and mental capacity sometimes diminish with age. The people may therefore wish to replace some older judges. Voluntary retirement will not always be sufficient. Nor may impeachment -- with its public humiliation and elaborate procedural machinery -- serve acceptably the goal of a fully functioning judiciary."

However, while most states have addressed this problem by placing mandatory retirement ages on judges at 70 or 75 years of age & our lower federal courts give judges the "rule of 80" option to enter senior status, reducing their workload, this problem has simply been ignored re: our highest court in the land.

[SteveRogers]

There is no Constitutional provision covering this issue. Impeachment would probably be the only proper remedy.

[Lincoln Republican]

In 1991, writing for a majority of the Court in Gregory v. Ashcroft, which addressed the constitutionality of a Missouri law requiring the states' judges & justices to retire at age 70, Sandra Day O'Connor wrote: "It is an unfortunate fact of life that physical and mental capacity sometimes diminish with age. The people may therefore wish to replace some older judges. Voluntary retirement will not always be sufficient. Nor may impeachment -- with its public humiliation and elaborate procedural machinery -- serve acceptably the goal of a fully functioning judiciary."

However, while most states have addressed this problem by placing mandatory retirement ages on judges at 70 or 75 years of age & our lower federal courts place judges in senior status at 70, reducing their workload, this problem has simply been ignored re: our highest court in the land.

Thank you for your input.

[Lincoln Republican]

There is no Constitutional provision covering this issue. Impeachment would probably be the only proper remedy.

Thank you for  your input.

However, impeachment is designed for circumstances regarding subversion of the constitution or for high crimes and misdemeanors.

I do not believe it would be fair to an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court to have as part of their legacy that they were impeached when they have done nothing to deserve impeachment.

[SteveRogers]

Another potential solution would be for congress to pass a law adding a 10th Justice to the Court but providing for the Court size to drop back down to 9 at the next vacancy.

[Lincoln Republican]

Another potential solution would be for congress to pass a law adding a 10th Justice to the Court but providing for the Court size to drop back down to 9 at the next vacancy.

A very interesting proposal.  Thank  you.

[Lincoln Republican]

True Federalist, as the unofficial constitutional authority on this forum, do  you have any insight as to what would happen in my scenario? 

[J. J.]

There is no Constitutional provision covering this issue. Impeachment would probably be the only proper remedy.

Thank you for  your input.

However, impeachment is designed for circumstances regarding subversion of the constitution or for high crimes and misdemeanors.

I do not believe it would be fair to an Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court to have as part of their legacy that they were impeached when they have done nothing to deserve impeachment.

An impeachable offense is whatever the House says it is, to paraphrase Gerald Ford.  Abandoning, even involuntarily, an office could easily be a misdemeanor.  It is clearly established that impeachment may used for actions that are either noncriminal or where the subject was tried in a criminal court and acquitted.

That said, I would suspect a lot of praise would be given to the person during the process and a lot of effort to make sure that the person would not recover.