[conservatism_IS_compassion]

With the way things are now, most of the Justices won’t take the risk of an ideological opposite taking their place, so they’ll stay until they’re carried out feet-first.

With longevity increasing, I'd say there's a good case for expanding the court to 11, and imposing 22-year term limits, staggered to produce a vacancy every 2 years. A two-term president would therefore name 4 out of the eleven justices . . . leaving it at nine would make 4 justices too much to give to one POTUS.

Term limiting Justices would of course require a constitutional amendment . . .

[fieldmarshaldj]

I’m not sure about expanding the size of the court, I think 9 is fine. A lot of courts around the nation (state Supremes, at least) have an age limit of 70, although I think there are many jurists that are still productive at that age, and I think it would make sense to impose an age limit of 80 for the USSC. At that age, it is clear most start to slow down. That is also the age CJ Rehnquist was when he passed, and perhaps it would be well to call it the “Rehnquist Amendment” of 80.

If imposed, this is how it would break down for the current court:

John Paul Stevens (4/20/2000 — immediate retirement)
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (8/10/2013)
Antonin Scalia (3/11/2016)
Anthony Kennedy (7/23/2016)
Stephen Breyer (8/15/2018)
David Souter (9/17/2019)
Clarence Thomas (6/23/2028)
Samuel Alito (4/1/2030)
CJ John Roberts (1/27/2035)