Cognitive Decline in Judges A Statistical Analysis of State Supreme Court and U.S. Supreme Court Judges’ Performance Over Time

Abstract

As the world grows ever older, so do members of the judiciary branch. With longer life-spans come longer terms served by U.S. Supreme Court Justices and State Supreme Court Judges. But is this a good thing?

Since the foundation of the US with the Constitution, Supreme Court Justices have experienced terms that last the rest of their lives. On a state level, however, there are many laws that state if retirement is mandated or not and at what age. These laws include: states with no law on mandatory retirement; states with laws on mandatory retirement for ages 70 and 75; and there are states with different age requirements for mandatory retirement.

Through statistical analysis and substantive readings on cognitive decline in adults in general and on the debate about policies considering this issue more specifically towards judges/justices, this thesis found that cognitive decline is highly individualistic in judges and justices. We analyzed both qualitative and quantitative performance metrics. A qualitative experiment run for U.S. Supreme Court Justices due to the fact that just about every Justice votes on every case, and a quantitative metric for State Supreme Court judges. We characterize a solution that could have bipartisan support, being an extremely private cognitive assessment for judges that starts between the ages of 70 and 75 and occurs annually until the judge leaves the bench. With extreme privacy of these cognitive assessments that aren’t required, and the results not being able to be compelled by a governing body, this policy seems the best and feasible to work.