<h3><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>Allison Shelley/Getty</span></p><p class="caption">Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 85, speaks on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC in March.</p></div><p></p></div></div></h3><ul><li><strong>The retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy means Trump can nominate a conservative for the nation's highest court.</strong></li><li><strong>With half the court aged over 70, further retirements would leave the court open to more conservative leanings.</strong></li><li><strong>The average age the last 11 justices retired at is 80, and their average tenure was 27 years.</strong></li><li><strong>Based on this trend, Ruth Bader Ginsberg could retire very soon, but the other 8 justices are way off.</strong></li><li><strong><strong>Trump has reportedly suggested that Sonia Sotomayor's term could be cut short by her diabetes, but she has pushed back against that.</strong></strong></li></ul><p>The announcement on Wednesday that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/justice-kennedy-retires-supreme-court-2018-6"> will retire in July</a> has given Trump a chance to choose his replacement - and has left people wondering when other seats on the court might become vacant.</p><p>Business Insider has calculated an average retirement age and tenure length for the last 11 justices to retire, going back to Justice Warren E. Burger, who quit in 1986.</p><p>The average age of retirement for the past 11 justices, including Kennedy was 80. <span>These justices spent at average of 27 years in the court.</span></p><p><span>We have averaged the two metrics to reach a ballpark year that the justices could retire based on precedent. It is worth remembering this is a rough prediction and a</span><span> justice can leave the Supreme Court at any time for any reason.</span></p><p>Scroll down to see where each Supreme Court justice stands - and when the figures suggest their term could end.</p><h2>Ruth Bader Ginsburg</h2><h3>Age: 85 (5 years past average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 24 years (3 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: Last year</h3><p>Born in <span>1933, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is now 85 years old - four years than older Kennedy, and five years past the average retirement age.</span></p><p><span>She took her seat on the Supreme Court in August 1993 after a nomination from Bill Clinton, and is three years shorter than the average tenure. </span><a href="http://uk.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-ruth-bader-ginsburg-resign-supreme-court-2016-7"></a></p><p>But Ginsburg<a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/justice-ginsburg-nearing-85-signals-she-wont-retire-soon" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> told PBS in January</a> that she would adopt the plan of former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired at the age of 90.</p><p><span>She further suggested that would be sticking to these plans and that she would not retire before the end of Trump's term as president by hiring four <a href="https://abovethelaw.com/2018/01/supreme-court-clerk-hiring-watch-new-year-new-hires-2/" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">full-time law clerks </a>through to 2020 - a move that is not typical for justices who plan on stepping down.</span></p><p><span>Ginsburg, who has become something of a liberal icon, <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/ruth-bader-ginsburg-85-and-no-signs-shell-retire-from-supreme-court">said in February:</a> </span>"As long as I can do the job full steam, I will be here."</p><h2>Stephen Breyer</h2><h3>Age: 79 (1 year before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 23 years (4 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2021</h3><p>At 79, Breyer has not made any suggestion that he will retire soon. He is a year younger than the average retirement age, and his tenure is currently four years shorter than the average.</p><p><span>Breyer has been a Supreme Court Justice since August 1994, following a nomination from President Bill Clinton.</span></p><p><span>As a liberal justice, Breyer may want to continue in office to prevent a conservative pick gaining his seat.</span></p><h2>Clarence Thomas</h2><h3>Age: 70 (10 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 26 years (1 year less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2024</h3><p>Highly conservative Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is 70, having served on the court since October 1991 after a nomination from George Bush. He is 10 years younger than the average retirement age, but he started relatively young, so his tenure is now just one year shorter than the average.</p><p>When rumors that a Supreme Court justice was to retire emerged, <a href="http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/06/supreme-court-retirements-kennedy-or-thomas-could-drop-bomb.html">some wondered if Thomas would go instead of Kennedy</a>.</p><p>Thomas made no public comment about this. A 2016 report that said he would retire was<a href="http://illinoisreview.typepad.com/illinoisreview/2016/06/about-the-rumor-that-clarence-thomas-is-retiring-.html"> rejected by his wife, Ginni, on Facebook</a>. She wrote: "IT. IS. BOGUS!"</p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><p class="source"><span>Alex Wong/Getty</span></p><p class="caption">The Supreme Court justices in 2017.  Front row from left: Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy, Chief Justice John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, and Stephen Breyer. Back row from left: Elena Kagan, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, and Neil Gorsuch</p></div><p></p></div></div></p><h2>Samuel Alito</h2><h3>Age: 68 (12 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 12 years (15 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2032</h3><p>Alito has been in his seat since January 2006, following a nomination from <span>President George W Bush. At 68, he has not made any public comments that suggest he may retire soon, and he is 12 years younger than the average retirement age, with another 15 years to go before his tenure reaches the average length.</span></p><p><span>A consistent conservative voter,<a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-alito-idUSKBN13C2E7"> he laid out a plan for the Supreme Court in 2016</a> if it won a conservative majority after Trump took office.  He may well want to see this agenda through now that Trump has added more conservative justices to the court.</span></p><h2>Sonia Sotomayor</h2><h3>Age: 64 (16 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 8 years (19 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2036</h3><p><span>At 64, Sotomayor has only served on the court since August 2009, after a nomination from President Barack Obama. She is 16 years younger than the average retirement age, and her tenure is currently 19 years behind the average length.</span><span></span></p><p><span>But Trump has reportedly said he believes he will be able to replace Sotomayor, citing her health. </span>Trump has talked about Sotomayor's Type 1 diabetes, <a href="https://www.axios.com/scoop-trump-privately-predicts-he-will-appoint-four-justices-1513306203-6274d9b0-1824-45ee-8556-fade9bdb2fd8.html">sources told to news website Axios</a>, saying: "Her health, no good. Diabetes."</p><p>Paramedics were called to Sotomayor's house in January, but she went back to work that day following treatment for low blood sugar. <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/01/19/sonia-sotomayor-health-scare-349971">She was not hospitalised, Politico reported.</a></p><p>Sotomayor previously <a href="http://www.diabetesforecast.org/2013/jul/sonia-sotomayor-her-life-with-diabetes.html">described herself as "super vigilant" about her condition.</a></p><p>As with the other liberal judges, she may well want to keep her seat for the near future to prevent it going to a conservative judge.</p><h2>John Roberts</h2><h3>Age: 63 (17 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 12 years (15 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2034</h3><p>At 63, Chief Justice John Roberts is one of the younger members of the court. He only took his seat in 2005, after he was nominated by <span>George W Bush.</span></p><p><span>Roberts is likely to become the court's swing vote following Kennedy's retirement, as Trump is likely to pick someone more conservative than him, leaving Roberts in an ideological middle between the more conservative and liberal members of the court. </span></p><p><span>There is no sign Roberts will step down anytime soon.</span></p><h2>Elena Kagan</h2><h3>Age: 58 (22 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 7 years (20 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2039</h3><p>Age 58, Kagan is a a liberal judge nominated by President Barak Obama and assumed the role in August 2010. She is 22 years younger than the average retirement age and has another 20 years to go before her tenure reaches the average length.</p><p>She was outspoken over the court's <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-upholds-trump-travel-ban-2018-6">decision to uphold Trump's travel ban</a>, <span>accusing conservative colleagues of using the First Amendment as "a sword" to influence <keyword id="6358883" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="politics">politics</keyword> and the economy.</span></p><p><span>She <a href="https://www.vox.com/2018/6/27/17510338/supreme-court-kagan-dissent-janus">called some of her colleagues</a> "black-robed rulers overriding citizens' choices," and it is unlikely that she will look to offer her seat to another conservative voice nominated by Trump.</span></p><h2>Neil Gorsuch</h2><h3>Age: 50 (30 years before average retirement)</h3><h3>Tenure: 1 year (26 years less than average)</h3><h3>Predicted departure: 2046</h3><p>Gorsuch only took his seat in April last year. He was nominated by Trump, and, at 50, is the youngest on the court. He has 30 years before he reaches the average retirement age, and another 26 years before he reaches the average tenure length.</p><p>The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/">reported that Trump talked about rescinding his nomination</a>, and was worried that Gorsuch would not be loyal enough. Trump has disputed these claims. Gorsuch has voted against Trump's administration previously, including <span><a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2018/04/17/immigration-ruling-gorsuch-528749">deporting immigrants who commit crimes in the US</a>.</span></p><p>Despite this, the young, conservative judge is likely to sit on the court and shape laws for decades to come.</p>    <div class="margin-top">        <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/what-happened-at-the-trump-north-korea-summit-2018-6">Why the North Korea summit mattered even if it was 'mostly a photo op'</a></h3>        <div>                    </div>    </div>

This is when every serving Supreme Court Justice could retire, based on age, average tenure and if they've said they might quit

<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div>President Barack Obama <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/world/obama-ordering-changes-in-us-hostage-policies.html?_r=0">announced on Tuesday</a> that the families of US hostages held by militant groups overseas would not be punished for trying to pay ransom to win their release.</p><p>The decision represents a significant shift in the government's approach toward dealing with terrorist organizations. In the past, families considering sending money to terrorist organizations like ISIS or Al Qaeda in exchange for their loved ones' release were met with consternation from administration officials.</p><p>Families offering to pay ransom could face criminal prosecution, officials told them, in accordance with the US government's strict "<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-is-making-a-big-change-to-one-of-the-most-fundamental-us-approaches-to-terrorists-2015-6">no-concessions</a>" to terrorists policy. (Though, as Obama noted on Wednesday, no family had ever been prosecuted for paying a ransom.)</p><p>We are now learning more about the families of James Foley, Kayla Mueller, Steven Sotloff, Peter Kassig, and Theo Padnos, thanks to a <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/06/five-hostages" target="_blank">piece from Lawrence Wright in The New Yorker</a>. Those families, frustrated with the government's inaction in the wake of their children's kidnappings, teamed up with a 62-year-old media mogul to change this policy for good. </p><p>The United States government's staunch policy of not paying ransom to terrorists for hostages was <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/us-paying-ransoms-to-terrorists-isis-james-foley-2014-8" target="_blank">questioned in the aftermath of the death of James Foley</a>, a US journalist kidnapped in 2011 and killed by the Islamic State last August. </p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">"They kept telling us to do nothing," Foley's mother, Diane, <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/06/five-hostages">told The New Yorker</a>.  </span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">"And telling us that our kid is their highest priority. Which we didn't believe."</span></p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Knowing the US doesn't negotiate with terrorists, the families - who later adopted the name P</span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">arents of American Hostages in Syria - </span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">said they hoped their children's kidnappers were Syrian government forces and not one of the rebel groups fighting the regime. At least then US officials might work to strike a deal with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad for their release.</span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Their independent investigations - spearheaded by the well-connected Atlantic Media owner <span>David Bradley</span><em> - </em>soon revealed that was not the case. Their children had been kidnapped by the Islamic State, and the US government was insisting they tell no one. The families soon learned of each other, however, finding solace in a shared struggle.</span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span>"They traded information about avenues they had explored and people they had approached-N.G.O. workers, State Department officials, F.B.I. agents-and they rebuked themselves for not having set up emergency contacts for their sons, and for not getting their digital passwords," Lawrence Wright writes in The New Yorker.</span></span></p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_left"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span>"As each learned more about the other's son, they saw how much the men had in common. What good friends they'll be when this is all over, they often said."</span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span>The families wrote a group letter to the White House asking the government to do more. "This is a moment of opportunity," the letter said, <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/06/five-hostages" target="_blank">according to The New Yorker.</a> "We have knowledge of the groups that are holding our children; we have knowledge of their location and the motives of their captors; we have examples of successful releases facilitated by foreign governments." </span></span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span>The fact that French, Spanish, and Italian hostages were being released by ISIS rather steadily gave the American families hope, and emboldened them to ask the administration to do more. </span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span>The FBI got involved, but its efforts were limited. </span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span><span>"The F.B.I. called me once a week from Washington, every Tues</span></span></span></span></span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">day between three-thirty and four o'clock, without fail, just to see if I had information for <em>them,</em>" Art Sotloff told the New Yorker. <span>"Not to give </span><em>me </em><span>information. After three or four phone calls, I just let them go to voice mail.</span><em>"</em></span></p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Even so, the FBI made it clear to the families that though they would happily take any information they had, the relationship could not extend any further since the families did not have the required security clearance. </span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"></span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The government's position at that time was clear. </span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">"We feel very strongly that it is not the right policy for governments to support the payment of ransom to terrorist organizations," Ben Rhodes, Obama's deputy national security adviser, </span><a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-is-making-a-big-change-to-one-of-the-most-fundamental-us-approaches-to-terrorists-2015-6">replied when asked</a> last year <span style="line-height: 1.5em;">whether the US needs to "rethink" its approach toward paying ransoms.</span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span><span>The families, too, had mixed feelings when it came to sending money to terrorists. The Foleys had already started fundraising and the Sotloffs were considering doing the same, but the Kassigs and the Muellers struggled with the moral implications of funding terrorists.</span></span></span></span></span></p><p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_left"><div><div class="image on-image"></div><p></p></div></div></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span><span>The issue of ransom payments aside, Barak Barfi - Steven Sotloff's best friend and an advisor to the families - has insisted that the White House effectively abandoned the hostages at a crucial moment. </span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span><span><span><span>"The White House did not do enough to rescue the four Americans," Barfi wrote in a recent <a href="http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/06/23/how-the-white-house-abandoned-american-hostages-foley-sotloff-mueller/">Foreign Policy op-ed</a>. "</span></span></span></span></span><span class="pull-quote has-quote" style="line-height: 1.5em;" data-pullquote="During Steve's imprisonment, it rarely worked with the hostages' families, kept them in the dark, and was essentially passive, rather than discussing ways to secure their release.">During Steve's imprisonment, it rarely worked with the hostages' families, kept them in the dark, and was essentially passive, rather than discussing ways to secure their release."</span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The government's latest policy shift allowing families to try and raise ransom - while an important concession - is too little, too late, Barfi noted. </span></p><p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">"<span>If the administration had employed its vast intelligence network," Barfi added, "it likely could have saved the Americans."</span></span></p><h3><a href="http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/07/06/five-hostages"><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><span>Check out the full story in The New Yorker &gt;&gt;</span></span></a></h3>    <div class="margin-top">        <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-running-president-2015-6">Here are all the best moments from Donald Trump's presidential announcement</a></h3>        <div>            <div>        <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="NudzFwdTo6LjJ5ItRE2VLJU84Dt1X3PZ" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div>        </div>        </div>            </div>

How 5 families teamed up to change one of the most basic US approaches toward dealing with terrorists

100 biographies to read in your lifetime

<p><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image"><p class="source"><span>AP</span></p></div><p></p></div></div>U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry released a statement in "support for Israel" Monday night, after a day of high-profile controversy surrounding his weekend <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/john-kerry-israel-apartheid-palestine-peace-process-2014-4" target="_blank">warning that Israel may become an "apartheid state"</a> if Israeli-Palestinian peace talks fall through.</p>
<p>"<span>I have been around long enough to also know the power of words to create a misimpression, even when unintentional, and if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two state solution," Kerry said in the statement.</span></p>
<p><span>Kerry's original comment, made at a closed-door meeting of the Trilateral Commission last Friday, spawned a wave of denouncement Monday from various U.S. politicians, along with Jewish leaders and groups. Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor called on Kerry to apologize, and Sen. Ted Cruz, the freshman Republican from Texas, said Kerry should resign. </span></p>
<p><span>His "apartheid" comment <span>broke a longstanding taboo of American officials on using the loaded term to describe Israel - then-Sen. Barack Obama denounced using the term in a 2008 interview. Kerry is believed to be the most-senior U.S. official to have ever used it.</span></span></p>
<p><span><span><span>AIPAC, the powerhouse pro-Israel lobby, said Kerry's reported remarks were "deeply troubling," "offensive," and "inappropriate." The Anti-Defamation League said it was "startling" and "disappointing."</span></span></span></p>
<p><span><span><span>Though apologetic, Kerry was also defiant in the statement, defending his record on Israel and repeating he won't "allow his commitment to Israel be questioned by anyone."</span></span></span></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span><span>Here's Kerry's full statement:<br /><br /></span></span><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">For more than thirty years in the United States Senate, I didn't just speak words in support of Israel, I walked the walk when it came time to vote and when it came time to fight. As Secretary of State, I have spent countless hours working with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Justice Minister Livni because I believe in the kind of future that Israel not only wants, but Israel deserves. I want to see a two state solution that results in a secure Jewish state and a prosperous Palestinian state, and I've actually worked for it.</span></p>
<p style="padding-left: 30px;"><span>I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes, so I want to be crystal clear about what I believe and what I don't believe.</span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>First, Israel is a vibrant democracy and I do not believe, nor have I ever stated, publicly or privately, that Israel is an apartheid state or that it intends to become one.  Anyone who knows anything about me knows that without a shred of doubt.</span><br /><span> </span><br /><span>Second, I have been around long enough to also know the power of words to create a misimpression, even when unintentional, and if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two state solution. In the long term, a unitary, binational state cannot be the democratic Jewish </span><span>s</span><span>tate that Israel deserves or the prosperous state with full rights that the Palestinian people deserve. That's what I said, and it's also what Prime Minister Netanyahu has said. While Justice Minister Livni, former Prime Ministers Barak and Ohlmert have all invoked the specter of apartheid to underscore the dangers of a unitary state for the future, it is a word best left out of the debate here at home.</span></p>

You Searched For "barak obama" and got 4 results

This is when every serving Supreme Court Justice could retire, based on age, average tenure and if they've said they might quit

Sinéad Baker,Sinéad Baker,Sin…

How 5 families teamed up to change one of the most basic US approaches toward dealing with terrorists

Natasha Bertrand

100 biographies to read in your lifetime

Megan Willett

JOHN KERRY: 'If I Could Rewind The Tape, I Would've Chosen A Different Word'

Brett LoGiurato