Federal judges in the United States are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate. The constitution does not impose any restrictions on who may be appointed and confirmed as a federal judge.
Where the constitution prescribes limitations on eligibility for the Presidency and Congress, those limitations have been held to be exhaustive (for example, term limits cannot be imposed on Congress because doing so would be inserting eligibility requirements in addition to those in the constitution).
If Article III is interpreted using a similar principle, then it means that notwithstanding any law to the contrary, the President may appoint, and the Senate may confirm, any living human as a federal judge, and the conflicting provisions in the law would be unconstitutional.
- Is there precedent regarding this issue?
- Have any legal experts opined about this issue?