Describe the nomination and approval process for a Supreme Court justice. How may a justice’s ideology and approach influence his or her court decisions?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

The president will nominate a replacement who will decide future cases with the same political ideology as his or her own. The members of the Senate not only look at a nominee’s party ideology and qualifications, but they are also influenced by different interest groups who seek to influence who is placed on the court. Although justices must base their decisions on the laws and the U.S. Constitution, they interpret those documents differently depending upon their ideologies. For example, liberal justices tend to emphasize due process rights more than conservative justices, who tend to focus more on strict punishment. Liberal justices tend to support an active government role in controlling business and economic activity as well as social matters. They tend to give more support to human rights, matters of privacy, and freedom of religion, speech, and the press. Conservative justices have a strong belief in following precedents, and a narrow view when interpreting the Constitution. They believe in limited government involvement, whereby government activity should be restricted to functions that support and protect citizens’ liberty. The justices also differ concerning their approaches regarding how a justice should make a decision. Some justices follow the policy of judicial restraint, which is the idea that the justices should be less active in reviewing cases from the legislatures and Congress. Other justices follow the policy of judicial activism, in which judges are more active in reviewing policies that come to them. An activist judge believes the proper role of the court is to uphold independent positions in deciding cases, to review the actions of the other branches of government vigorously, to be willing to strike down policies that are unconstitutional, and to impose remedies for legal wrongs when necessary. Under this premise, the court should make changes in public policy, and use its power to declare acts of Congress invalid, when necessary.