In one of the strongest democracies in the world, a single Supreme Court decision can affect the country for decades, and the people who make those decisions serve for life.

Debate on Supreme Court Justice limits has existed since before the framing of the U.S. Constitution, but has significantly become a bigger topic in recent decades because of the rapid growth in our country and its beliefs.

At this time in history, the United States seems to be as separated as ever, with partisanship at its peak causing constant left and right battles, in court and out in the society. Now, most of all, we need to have a strong system that keeps the nation’s most powerful judges from falling too far from the citizens who are affected and dependent on their decisions.

The idea of changing lifetime appointments to fixed appointments needs to become a reality now. Honors U.S. History teacher Anne-Marie Steppling said, “SCOTUS justices should have term limits to ensure the continuity of the interpretation of the Constitution. They are not supposed to sway with public opinion or popular culture.”

People may argue that Supreme Court justices should keep lifetime appointments because it protects their independence. They claim that without having pressure to get reappointed, justices can make Constitutional based decisions, not political ones. Others say lifetime seats prevent the court from becoming too connected with elections or public opinion.

This view ignores how unrealistic and unnecessary lifetime power is in the current day. Staying on the Court for 40 or more years doesn’t make justices more independent. If anything, it makes them less connected to the country that they are supposed to serve. Older justices are still thinking about the way the country worked decades ago instead of focusing on current values and new rules.

Others may refute by claiming that the justices need a lifetime appointment because the longer they are in the position, the more they build relations with others and feel out the experiences associated with the position. This is a strong point yet the overpowering of the lifelong term they serve drowns out the time they need to adjust. The current court allows a small group of unelected people to hold an extreme influence over a quickly growing and changing country.

No democracy should have any person in power serve for life, especially those whose decisions impact the country for decades to come and can shape the future of government.

Having Supreme Court terms limited to 20 years will ensure that every American citizen is accurately represented and the country has a chance to grow and change along with the people. It would also restore balance and ensure that the Court changes alongside the country instead of standing above it. Term limits still give the courts independence, but they also create equity and a court that properly reflects the people and country that it is impacting.