Some commentators feel that the appointment of Supreme Court justices by the chief executive (the President of the United States) ensures that the Supreme Court will always be a political body, voting politically on cases that come before it. Do you agree? Why or why not?
What will be an ideal response?
Even though the president nominates justices for the Supreme Court, the Senate must approve the nominations. This process of confirming the appointee is one way that the possible political bias of a particular potential Supreme Court justice can be examined in public hearings by members of the opposite political party. Additionally, there are many cases in which the actual rulings by a Supreme Court justice are the opposite of what the appointing president would have liked. Further, the fact that these are lifetime appointments means that the Supreme Court justices are no longer subject to political pressure once they start working in the United States Supreme Court.
You might also like to view...
A player selects one, two, or three digits from 0 to 9 with the odds of winning running from 10 to 1, 100 to 1, and 1,000 to 1 in which game?
A) ?craps B) ?blackjack C) ?numbers D) ?policy
In _____________________, the court ruled that the search of a city employee's city paid pager's text messages was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment
a. Florida v. Riley b. Zurcher v. Stanford Daily c. Ontario v. Quon d. Jones v. Smith
The average deviation is the average variation of scores from the mean of their distribution
Indicate whether the statement is true or false.
Prosecutors and defense counsel can appeal the findings of guild or innocence from the trial stage
a. true b. false