Recently Judge Ginsburg in an interview stated that the United States Constitution is outdated and she personally would not advise any country to use the United States Constitution as a base document when setting up their Constitution.  She had suggested using the South Africa Constitution or even Canada’s constitution.  Both of these documents are radicle opposite when compared to the US Constitution; they both give all the power to the government so it is a top down government.  Our Framers fully intended to give the power to the people; furthermore the Canadian Constitution specifically denies all religious preachers from preaching some passages from the bible or specific doctrines if they are subversive or counter government.

• This would put judges under the will of the people; unfortunately this is the only branch of government that does not receive a vote by the people.  Although it is not a vote to replace them.
• It would also have a self-check result whereby any Supreme Court Judge will know they are subject to a confidence/no-confidence vote if they do not adhere to the Constitution.
• It can only be used for Constitutional matters; all other matters will not be a basis for a confidence/no-confidence vote.

If a Supreme Court judge reaches a no-confidence by the people that no confidence vote will be recommending that the judge be required to appear before congress for a new advice and consent hearing.

• Congress can vote not to bring the Supreme Court Justice to a consent hearing, to do nothing and let the judge return, however, that judge has just received their first no confidence and two no confidence votes by the people would automatically retire a judge.
• Congress can schedule a hearing and perform their duties to inquire during that hearing as to the Supreme Court Judges past rulings that violated the Constitution or writings or public speaking that have a negative effect on the Constitution. (Judge Ginsburg would have fallen under this category, and although our country has freedom of speech if Supreme Court Judges do not believe in the constitution they have no business serving as a Supreme Court Judge.) Congress during the new advice and consent hearing can decide to either return the no confidence judge back to the bench on the Supreme Court or advise the President as they would on any new judge of whether to move forward or appoint someone new.

The President at his/her discretion can either return the judge back to the bench or he can send a new candidate to Congress starting a new advice and consent process for the new candidate.

Although we have impeachment as a tool for Congress to use against treasonous Supreme Court Judges or those that do not uphold the Constitution.  Congress has been reluctant to use this for various reasons therefore we are now left with judges like Judge Ginsburg and Steven Breyer who like to legislate from the bench and have formally stated that they think the constitution is outdated.

I also believe that this can be streamlined so that during the Supreme Court recess a judge can be reviewed and voted on by the people and Congress can have a hearing all can be done and back to the president within three days. The President can surely make a decision to return the candidate back to the bench or submit a new candidate within two days, making the total turnaround time of two weeks (which includes a new nomination process for replacement of the no-confidence judge).

Benefits to this Process:

• Like Congress and the Executive Branch it pulls the people into the process of electing or at least having a say in the Supreme Court Justice
• It puts Supreme Court Justice’s on notice that it is possible for a review if their rulings or writings do not adhere to the Constitution
• It continues to keep Congress and Executive Branch involved