The Importance Of Supreme Court Justices

395 Words1 Page
bulb-icon

Recommended: The current role of the court in the american political system

 The reason why the Supreme Court justices are appointed for life because it is to avoid political pressure. The reason to avoid political pressure is that they need to be secure in their jobs, which means that they are away from any disposition to vote in a certain way. This certain way to vote is in order for them to get re-nominated and serve another term.  Some benefits of requiring justices to serve a defined and limited term are because when times change, the people do too. This being said if it was a limited term, there are things that the Federal benefits have that may not apply to the U.S. Supreme Court. Maybe it’s the best justices that receive pensions when they reach the age of retirement. As a matter of fact, the Legislation

Show More
Related

  • The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court by Jeffrey Toobin

    1205 Words  | 3 Pages

    ... eye. While Toobin gave me great insight to the people who make up the Supreme Court, this book has become dated in some aspects. Stevens and Souter no longer are a part of the Supreme Court. As this book shows, each individual Justice makes up the personality of Supreme Court, which is now sightly different, without Justices Stevens and Souter. The nine justices in the book served together longer than any other group of Justices. Toobin describes the how each of the Justices got appointed to the Supreme court, including the failed nominations that ultimately brought each of the Justices to the Supreme court. The Supreme Court shapes our country in ways that no other branch of government can, because they are appointed for life. Ultimately, nominating a Supreme Court Justics, is one of the most far reaching and lasting way a president can shape our nation.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Federal Court Judges

    1751 Words  | 4 Pages

    It is simple to be confused by the federal court judges and their decisions and how they go about them and how they are in their position. Personally, I always thought they were elected by the Supreme Court or someone or something higher than them. But I was very surprised to know that they were appointed (assigned a job or role to). This leaves the judges from having to go through a process of campaigning and running against others. Although by being unelected officials it has both pros and cons. Pros being, that they are trusted enough to handle cases that go to this point and being able to make a decision under the law to better the society. Cons being, if a federal court judge makes any misdemeanor or crime they have the ability to be impeached

    Read More

  • 22nd Amendment Essay

    868 Words  | 2 Pages

    The 22nd Amendment creates a lame duck and which stops abuse of power3. Presidents in their second term have been seen to usually suffer diminished power, particularly after the second midterm elections. This diminish of power creates a lame duck. The president becoming a lame duck, stops him from being able abuse of power. The 22nd Amendment also stops the country from being a monarchy. US. Senators and Congressmen don’t have term limits because their voices are balanced by opposing parties in their chambers, the presidency is different. The president has no similar

    Read More

  • Term Limits In Supreme Court Justices

    1089 Words  | 3 Pages

    Life tenure creates at least three problems. First, it allows bad judges to stay on the bench for an indefinite period of time. Second, life tenure allows all judges, including those judges who were very good at what they did, to stay on the bench even after they are long past doing their best work. Third and finally, life tenure allows justices to “rig the system”, as their productivity and effectiveness drastically decrease, while they wait for a president to nominate their successor who has similar viewpoints to theirs (Lazarus

    Read More

  • What Are The Benefits And Disadvantages Of The Texas Court System

    885 Words  | 2 Pages

    There are many potential benefits and disadvantages to electing judges to Texas’ highest courts. The decision to elect judges is an interesting one. On the positive side, the Texas Judges are always in tune with what is going on in Texas currently. It keeps faces fresh and forces them to make the decisions that the people want by way of laws rules and state morals. It also holds the party ideals that many Texans want accountable. This is one of the common complaints about the United States Supreme Court. The complaint is that many Supreme Court justices are out of touch with what the people want. That they are not held accountable for their findings within each court case. Texas aims to stop this with elections every six years. The downside to this election based court justices is the same answer as to the benefits. They are forced to be in tune with what Texans want which is not necessarily the best for all Texas citizens particularly minorities. Texas judges cannot make unpopular decisions and expect to keep their job. So even if it might be the “right” decision, it is not necessarily the decision the Texas courts might come

    Read More

  • The Supreme Court

    1073 Words  | 3 Pages

    Presently the supreme court has nine members, which include one Chief Justice and eight associate Justices. The Chief Justice Appoints each associate Justice to oversee one or more various circuits. Every year the Supreme Court has a term in which it revues selected cases. This term starts on the first Monday of October and ends either in the end of June or the beginning of July. During this term the Justices review one-hundred out of 6,000 or so cases with no clear guidelines on which ones they must look at.

    Read More

  • Federal Judges Pros And Cons

    220 Words  | 1 Pages

    Eliminating the lifetime tenure for federal judges to a 15-year term that is not renewed would be beneficial to the US Constitution. When judges are selected they are used for tactical behaviors that Presidents and justices have used. When the President appoints younger people they do this to capitalize on their capability to sway the Supreme Court. When Clarence Thomas was appointed he was 43, and John Marshall was appointed Chief Justice in 1801 by John Adams. Republicans average age for appointees is about 50, Anthony Kennedy was the last one nominated in 1988 at the age of 51, whereas 56.5 is the average age for Democrats, and Arthur Goldberg joined the Supreme Court in 1962 at the age of 54.

    Read More

  • John Marshall's Effect on the American Judicial System

    1672 Words  | 4 Pages

    Dye, Thomas R. , L. Tucker Gibson Jr., and Clay Robinson. Politics In America. Brief Texas Edition ed. New Jersey: Pearson, 2005.

    Read More

  • The Honorable John G. Roberts, Jr : A Biographical Sketch of the 17th Chief Justice of the United States

    911 Words  | 2 Pages

    The 59 year old John Glover Roberts Jr, was born on January 27, 1955 in Buffalo, New York. He was the only son of John G. “Jack” Glover Sr. and Rosemary Podrasky Roberts. His ancestry being Irish, Welsh, and Czech (O'Dowd).

    Read More

  • The Importance Of The US Constitution

    1142 Words  | 3 Pages

    Unlike many other foundational documents written by other counties, the US Constitution has held strong from the start. The Constitution is at the center of our everyday lives and is the reason we are able to live with the freedom and security that we do. As the Constitutions author, contents, and effect on the US are evaluated it is very clear why America holds so strongly to the foundation the Constitution set in place.

    Read More

  • Should Supreme Court Judges Change

    1042 Words  | 3 Pages

    People say that every professor uses its own books when they go teach a class. It should be the same way for Presidents and the makeup of the Supreme Court. In Article III it states that a once elected into the Supreme Court judges can stay in power for as long as they want. Having the Supreme Court judges stay in power for as long as they want is not good. Judges see the world differently from what it was to what it is now, the president should be able to choose who is on his “team”, and finally it stops the fear of the citizens of a bad choice for justice.

    Read More

  • Members of Congress Should Have Term Limits

    1810 Words  | 4 Pages

    When the United States was founded, the theme behind the new government was to establish an efficient system without doling out too much power to any one person. The Founders intended to prevent a rebirth of tyranny, which they had just escaped by breaking away from England. However, when members of Congress such as Tom Foley, who served as a Representative from 1964 through 1995, and Jack Brooks, who served as a Representative from 1952 through 1994, remain in the legislative system for over forty years, it is evident that tyranny has not necessarily been eradicated from the United States (Vance, 1994, p. 429). Term limits are a necessity to uphold the Founders’ intentions, to prevent unfair advantages given to incumbents, and to allow a multitude of additional benefits.

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Judicial Review

    1015 Words  | 3 Pages

    is one of the sole purposes of the Supreme Court of the United States. Many

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay: What Is The Future Of The Supreme Court?

    379 Words  | 1 Pages

    The future of the Supreme Court is in question after the sudden death of Justice Antonin Scalia, a steadfast and outspoken conservative. His passing leaves the Supreme Court at eight justices, of which four are relatively liberal and the other four, conservative. Thus, on the most divisive issues, it is likely that the court will split evenly. With no majority ruling, the decision of the lower court remains in effect; therefore, if Obama is not able to appoint a new justice, the Supreme Court is almost powerless. Any justice appointed by the president must be passed through the Senate’s Judiciary Committee, and Republicans in the Senate will attempt to delay confirmation, hoping that the next president (who will take office in January

    Read More

  • Decision-Making in a Democracy: the Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker

    829 Words  | 2 Pages

    The significant impact Robert Dahl’s article, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: the Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker” created for our thought on the Supreme Court it that it thoroughly paved the way towards exemplifying the relationship between public opinion and the United States Supreme Court. Dahl significantly was able to provide linkages between the Supreme Court and the environment that surrounds it in order for others to better understand the fundamental aspects that link the two together and explore possible reasoning and potential outcomes of the Court.

    Read More

More about The Importance Of Supreme Court Justices

Open Document