[EL] Retiring Supremes

[George Korbel]

I presume that the reason that the Justices live as long as they do is due to the excellent government health insurance that they receive.  
 



From: still at votelaw.com
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:38:45 -0600
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Retiring Supremes

I remember someone quoting a statistic that Supreme Court justices and symphony orchestra conductors had particularly long lives. Whether they are in good health may be another question.

Edward Still
Edward Still Law Firm LLC
130 Wildwood Parkway STE 108-304
Birmingham AL 35209
still at votelaw.com  
www.votelaw.com/blog
www.edwardstill.com
www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill




On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:08 PM, Adam Morse <ahmorse at gmail.com> wrote:

Seems like a high estimate to me.  I don't think we can exclude sudden illnesses and accidents--in a geriatric institution, those are a major source of turnover.  But even so, I think 3 would be on the high end, and 0 is possible.


There are currently 4 justices over the age of 70:  Scalia (76), Kennedy (76), Ginsburg (79), Breyer (74).  I would be very surprised if either Scalia or Kennedy retired except due to extreme bad health in the next 4 years.  I'm not sure what the odds are of very bad health or death for wealthy people aged 76-80 given very good healthcare, but I would be surprised if more than 1 of them opened a vacancy in the next 4 years, and not at all surprised if 0 did.  Ginsburg might well choose to retire if her health starts failing, as might Breyer.  But if they're doing well in 3 years, they might choose to stay on the Court, notwithstanding their age.  All of the other justices are relatively young (under 65), with all of the other Democratic justices very young (58 and 54).  Hard to imagine anyone outside of Scalia, Kennedy, Ginsburg, or Breyer leaving the court except due to misfortune.


Without having done actuarial research, I would guess that there's at least as good a chance of 0 vacancies as 3.  I would say that 1 or 2 vacancies seem likely, 0 possible, and 3 unlikely but possible.  So in that sense, "1-3 likely" is true, but mostly because of 1-2.  I would be very surprised if there were more than 4 vacancies in the next presidential term, and not surprised if there were none.


--Adam Morse



On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:34 PM, Doug Hess <douglasrhess at gmail.com> wrote:



The Duffield article from the law blog said that "President Obama will likely fill between one and three Supreme Court vacancies in the next four years."  Does that seem right? Assuming no sudden illnesses, accidents, etc., who might be leaving (and in what order would you prioritize your guesses)?
 
Doug 
 
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election


_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election


_______________________________________________ Law-election mailing list Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130104/f0bdca75/attachment.html>