Judges
![Picture](/uploads/1/7/9/9/17990321/216230417.jpg)
Instead of Article 3, Section 1, I would have judges only have 10 year term. Congress would appoint new judges at the end of this ten year term. A result of this would be that every ten years we would have new and possibly better judges. However, If you are not appointed again as a judge, you would be without a paying job, so this change is a negative one for current federal judges. Because new judges would be brought in every ten years, new ideas and opinions would arrive in the federal court. This is a good thing, because you want up-to-date judges who were taught in more modern times. On the other hand, older judges with more experience might never resurface in the federal courts, and that could be a major disadvantage, since they have been working with federal law for a long time and know a lot about it. And while new ideas and new people are good, inexperienced judges may make verdicts that don't make sense, and they might not be correct. As a result, bills or laws may be deemed unconstitutional by new judges when they are in fact constitutional, effectively eliminating a fair or just law. In general, this change wouldn't be a good one, since older, more experienced judges will be out of a job after their ten year term, and, although new judges bring new ideas, they might not make just and fair verdicts.