Supreme Court Justice Admits Term Limits Would Make His Life Easier

Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer is at the center of a fight on the Democratic side of the aisle, with Breyer refusing to retire even though liberals want him to vacate his seat before Republicans take over again. Breyer admitted in an interview this weekend that he has no intention of dying on the court, and that he'll retire when he is ready, but he also added that term limits would make his life so much easier. That's really all we need to know about the position that Breyer is in, and if more people supported term limits we might actually be able to save the court. Ring of Fire's Farron Cousins discusses this.

Link omenews/sundaytalkshows/571877breyersaystermlimitswouldmakelifeeasierforme

Become a member today!

Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!

Find our merchandise at Teespring

Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!

Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel

Be sociable! Follow us on:

Follow more of our stories at

Subscribe to our podcast

*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.

Supreme court justice, Stephen Breyer, who just turned 83 years old, did an interview with Fox news this past weekend, where he once again, reiterated that he is going to retire on his own terms. You cannot pressure him into retiring. He of course has no intention of dying on the court as if that's something he can control. But he says, when it's time for him to retire, he's, he's going to retire. But then he admitted something else. He admitted that term limits would make his life a lot easier. Here's what he said. When asked about term limits, he said, I think you could do that. It should be a very long term because you don't want the judges, you know, who's holding that term to start thinking about his next job. But it would make life easier for me. Okay.

So you've just actually pointed out a very valid problem with term limits and that is sure, we don't want these judges thinking, okay, well, I don't want to be too hard on this corporation with this ruling because, you know, maybe they hire me as one of their lawyers after I leave here. And if you think that's not possible, folks, let me just direct you to the last 30 years of the US department of justice. That's what happens. Why don't you go look up where Eric Holder is now. He's working for the same people he didn't prosecute as attorney general of the United States. This is what they do. There is that revolving door although people don't pay as much attention to it in the judiciary as they do with like the FDA or the EPA or any of the other agencies. But this is a real problem that he brings up and I'm glad he did because let's talk about it.

Okay, cool. You don't want people thinking about their next job. I agree with you. So how long do you want these term limits to be? Nine years was the number floated out before. What about 15, is 15 good enough? Is 20 good enough? 20 is a bit too long though if you ask me. I mean, that could really take you through five different presidential administrations. That's too much. 15, eh, I still think that's too much. I'm going to stick with nine actually, but thank you for your concern, Stephen Breyer. And here's why. Because not only do we put in the term limits, but we're going to have to spend a little money here and even though you don't get to sit on the court for the rest of your life, we're going to give you your pay for the rest of the life, because we're going to bar you from practicing law further beyond that. That's it. No more.

We basically force you into retirement. But that becomes a condition. You want to take that job. You want to sit on the United States Supreme Court. You want to be the law of the land then you also have to accept the limitations that come with it for once you leave the court. We can do that. Okay. We can just write that into the constitutional amendment, which is what it would take in order to put term limits on the United States Supreme Court and every other federal court in this country. There should be no lifetime appointments. Now we can quibble over how to handle that. Sure. We can quibble over the number, you know, the limit of the actual term limit. That's something that could be negotiated. That's something that could be worked on.