Since we do not have a mandatory retirement age for members of the Supreme Court, when a serving member dies, it throws our court into a dither, especially on social issues the court is hearing that typically go five to four, one way or the other. So the question of the day is, should a president nominate a member to the highest court in the land during his last year in office? In Mike Littwin’s article this week, he makes the case that Republicans would be better off if the Senate voted on the president’s nominee rather than deferred on the process. It would seem to me that the better solution would be to let the nation vote on the next president first. In that way, during the primaries and general election, the candidates would let the people know where they stand on the many issues before the court and the people would select the next president based on the court issues, as well as many others facing this country. Why would a lame-duck president, with poll numbers in the 40s after seven-plus years in office, want to make such a decision? Shouldn’t he encourage the voters to listen to the candidates and vote based on the issues? The next president would then be empowered by the people to select the next Supreme Court Judge. That’s presidential leadership we have sorely missed over the past many years.

Bob Cardwell

Frisco