I saw that the Sixth Circuit upheld Michigan’s constitutional limitation on judges not serving past their 70th birthday. Though it seems crazy, more than half the states have similar provisions. Ours was included in the 1818 Constitution and remains in force and effect, though there’s a statute allowing for unfinished business to be wrapped up before a judge hangs up the robe.

Two hundred years ago, it was pretty unusual for people to live—let alone work—into their 70s. There is some interesting dicta in the occasional case in which courts have reviewed the issue of mandatory judicial retirement, usually in the context of someone aging out during the consideration or reconsideration of a close case. A century ago, the arguments seemed to be that it was self-evident that a judge entering her or his eighth decade might not be sharp enough to be trusted with the public good. Now, the decisions defend the practice on the basis that it’s been the law for centuries, and if the rules are to be changed, it’s up to the legislature to amend the Constitution, not an appellate court.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]