Texas voters rejected a proposal to raise the mandatory retirement age for judges. The outcome in Tuesday's off-year elections turned heads and drew new attention to issues of age and fitness for office in the U.S.

When it comes to age on the ballot, Texas didn’t wait until 2024 to weigh in.

Asked to let judges stay on the bench until they’re 79 years old — a year younger than President Joe Biden — Texas voters soundly rejected the proposal in Tuesday’s elections, a defeat that drew new attention to issues of age and fitness for office in the U.S.

“Age is front of mind for American voters in a way that it has not traditionally been and they are nervous about it,” said Cal Jillson, a political science professor at Southern Methodist University.

Others cautioned against broader takeaways. At least four other states have rejected similar proposals over the last decade, according to the National Center for State Courts. And states that have passed the measures have mostly done so in close votes.

  • be_excellent_to_each_other
    -2•1 year ago

    How do you establish competency when the people you are measuring are the people putting the test on, grading it, choosing its metrics, and who define competency as “the thing Im doing right now, thank you very much”?

    So we don’t have ANYONE under your arbitrary line with enough experience and power to set such competency standards? No one at all?

    Youre arguing for a vapid

    On second thought, fuck you.

    • @[email protected]
      3•1 year ago

      This would be a law. Politicians make, set, and edit laws.

      Anyone put into place could and would be replaced by politicians who wanted to make sure they pass the test.

      Youre relying on human failibility, and emotional weight. Your last sentence reinforcing that.

      You know what cant be bribed, blackmailed, or replaced by a politician without the public noticing? A hard line defined by the passage of time.

      But youve clearly run out of reasons to back your idea.