system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Supreme Court Justices shouldn’t serve for life, and should have some limit

I get they’re supposed to be the protectors of the constitution and all, so, in theory, they don’t really need to have an age limit, but I think they should. Some people are gonna have opinions and biases, depending on religion, political party, generation, everything. 

I think it’s unfair that they can serve 40+ years at times. If they are quite biased, and the court isn’t evenly split at all, it’s kind of like the rights of the people will be protected in a certain way, for possibly 40 years!!! Not everyone is gonna like how they’re protected!!

They also may carry very old-fashioned views with them, and they won’t be protecting the constitution in a way that applies to today’s thoughts and opinions, but to their generation’s thoughts and opinions.

The constitution can be interpreted in different ways. We don’t need to be stuck with one type of interpretation for years and years.

I don’t think they should be elected, but I think they should have some sort of limit, and I don’t see a reason why they can’t.

Edit: if you’re gonna comment that I only said this because of my political biases, just don’t. First of all, multiple people have already told me that. Second, it’s not true. My opinion would’ve initially been this a month ago, a year ago, or two years ago.
gpt
There's nothing wrong conceptually with having a retirement age for the US Supreme Court. Canadian Supreme Court justices have to retire at 75 and this has mostly worked out.

However, the US Supreme Court has become so politicized that there is already a strong bias for younger judges. A retirement age would put even more pressure against older judges been appointed, which would further narrow the chance of getting the 'best' candidate.