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.

  • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    Do you think Texas would be on board for this as a rule for the Supreme Court, where the two oldest justices are Thomas and Alito?

    • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Imo age is a shitty metric to go by because it misses outward indications of maturity or debilitation. Just because someone is 70 doesn’t mean they have dementia (or dementia could have started when they were 50), and just because someone is 17 doesn’t mean they’re not knowledgable enough to vote for a gov’t.

      • EatYouWell@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The problem isn’t dementia, the problem is that they won’t live to see the consequences of their actions.

        • NewNewAccount@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s hardly the problem, imo.

          “A society grows great when old men plant trees in whose shade they shall not never sit.”

          Many of our actions will have consequences that will outlive us. The question is whether the institution is well equipped to behave ethically and just. One of he contributing factors is that all justices are of sound mind, regardless of age.

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The consequences of your actions will affect your great-grandkids but you’re unlikely to be alive to see it happen.

          Does that mean you should be cancelled as well?

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ideally, there’d be some sort of objective and widely accepted “mental fitness” test.

        Unfortunately that ideal doesn’t exist. Age is merely the best substitute for that we’ve got on hand.

      • AA5B@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The huge plus for using age as a metric is that it’s objective and straightforward. Birth certificates are public record, so ages are generally well known, and there can be a clear cutoff, without leaving room for potentially biased judgement calls, nor room for lengthy appeals.