The age of constitutional senility
April 8, 2008
Today marked Court of Appeals Judge Irma S. Raker’s last session of oral argument before turning 70, and Chief Judge Robert M. Bell used the occasion to take a not-so-subtle jibe at the Maryland Constitution’s requirement that jurists retire upon hitting that magic age.
Shortly after beginning Tuesday’s session at 10 a.m., Bell heaped praise on Raker, saying she has “served this court with distinction,” noting her “strong intellect” and thanking her for placing great importance on “civility” among the judges and the attorneys who appear before them.
Then the chief judge delivered the kicker: “The Constitution regards her as senile.”
Raker will join Judge Dale R. Cathell as Court of Appeals judges who have reached age 70 but remain on the top court until a successor is appointed.
Cathell, noting that they are similarly situated, said he welcomes the fact that Raker “joins me in senility.”
STEVE LASH, Legal Affairs Writer
Sphere: Related ContentComments
One Response to “The age of constitutional senility”
Got something to say?
As I’ve written before, mandatory retirement at 70 for judges is outdated. Fortunately, it seems that everyone who wants to finds a way to continue to sit after mandatory retirement. But it is time to amend the constitution, at least with respect to judges.