The amendment to the current US Constitution was years ago. There are clauses that one should amend in light of the current issues and trends in the American society.
The “natural born citizen” Clause
The Amendment 14 of the US Constitution provides that to be a president, a person must be born within the United States. In the past, various leaders have exemplified quality leadership in other political positions even though they did not meet the “natural born citizen criteria”. Such leaders include Elaine Chao (Taiwanese), Madeline Albright (Czechoslovakian born), and Jennifer Granholm (Canadian). As such, I would change Section 1 of Article 2 to allow any US citizen to vie for presidency regardless of whether their parents are non-American citizens.
Federal Voting Right
The Americans believe and often declare their right to vote. However, the reality is very different as exemplified in the George W. Bush versus Al Gore case. The case is an indication that there is no affirmative federal right to vote but courts refer to the state-based vote to determine the winner of a presidential election. A change to the Constitution to allow a voting experience to each American regardless of where they live would be important to guarantee individual voting experience and legal protection. The voting age should also be lower. Persons from the age of 16 can work and pay taxes just like any 18-year-old can. As such, I would lower the age of voting to 16.
No Life tenure for the Supreme Court Justices
A long non-renewable term would be better than the lifetime tenure for the US Supreme Court justices. This aspect should also be applicable to the chief justice whose term should be a renewable four-year term. Entrenching such a limiting clause in the Constitution would reduce the amount of debate regarding nominations to the court given that the stakes would not be so high. Such clause should also lessen the pressure to appoint young justices to the court. This would also help in reducing the pressure on justices to retire for fear that a member of the opposite political allegiance would appoint their replacement. It would therefore encourage bringing of young and fresh thoughts in the judicial system.
