When it comes to age on the ballot, Texas didn’t wait until 2024 to weigh in.

Asked to let judges stay on the bench until they’re 79 years old — a year younger than President Joe Biden — Texas voters soundly rejected the proposal in Tuesday’s elections, a defeat that drew new attention to issues of age and fitness for office in the U.S.

“Age is front of mind for American voters in a way that it has not traditionally been and they are nervous about it,” said Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University.

Others cautioned against broader takeaways. At least four other states have rejected similar proposals over the last decade, according to the National Center for State Courts. And states that have passed the measures have mostly done so in close votes.

  • Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    11 months ago

    Get ready for an unpopular opinion: Old age should not be a basis on which someone is disqualified from holding office.

    Why not? Because it is wrong to cast aspersions on someone because of something they did not choose. It remains appropriate to only qualify people for elected office if they are old enough, because we want people to have enough perspective and life experience, and that is directly related to being old enough.

    • QuinceDaPence@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      My concern is judges that old not understanding the modern way of life for most people.

      The life of a moden 25 year old and a 75 year old judge when he was 25 are so different they may as well have been from opposite ends of the world.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        The real problem lies in the how SCOTUS rules on Constitutional matters, using “original intent” vs “original intent AND current societal, technological, etc changes” (which is how Canada’s SCoC rules).

    • Neato@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      It remains appropriate to only qualify people for elected office if they are old enough,

      Fun fact: it’s legal to discriminate in the US based on age. But only towards younger, not older. You can’t discriminate because someone is too old, but you CAN if they are “too young”.

    • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Saying a class of people shouldn’t be making rights for the country when they won’t be around to see the consequences isn’t casting aspersions on anyone.

    • DarkGamer@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      it is wrong to cast aspersions on someone because of something they did not choose.

      Maybe it’s not about casting aspersions but rather fitness for the job. If a surgeon loses their arms in a tragic accident they probably won’t be allowed to operate. Pilots are forced to retire at a certain age because of this well documented age-related decline. If natural mental decline from age impairs one’s ability to make fair and reasonable judgements and/or causes one to lose touch with the society they are resolving conflicts within, that seems like it would similarly impair a judge’s ability to effectively do their job.

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think term limits would rid us of career politicians like McConnell. Why have term limits for president and not far more powerful senators?

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        11 months ago

        The only reason we have term limits for President is because the Republican party wanted to ensure that they got “a turn” in the wake of FDR.