Federalist analysis

1.

           Hamilton argues that federal judges should have life tenure for as long as they maintain GOOD BEHAVIOUR. His argument is based on the belief that good behavior is an important trait for judges. Since judges hold the final ruling, good behavior acts as a measure to ensure that they remain fair in all their rulings (Hamilton, n.d). However, since judges are also human and can also make mistakes that interfere with their rulings, Hamilton argues that the character displayed by judges in all aspects of their life should thus determine how long they remain in office. Good behavior is therefore used as a representation of the type of person the judge is in the eyes of society and their commitment to uphold good morals and also observe ethics when making rulings. 

I agree with Hamilton’s argument that judges should serve life tenures because the position requires experience and a sense of authority. Judges often have to hear different cases and compare evidence before making just rulings. Although education systems equip law students with enough skills and knowledge to become good judges, experience brings in wisdom and an ability to discern facts that can only be achieved over time. Life tenures, therefore, give judges the ability to gain more knowledge and skills which in turn helps victims to receive the justice they seek (Hamilton, n.d). Hamilton however ensures to restrict the power that judges have by including a clause where judges can only retain office if they retain good behavior. The provision ensures that judges remain fair and just in their rulings while also giving the public the means and power to bring down judges who abuse the power afforded to them by their position.

 

References

Hamilton A, (n.d) “Federalist #78”