Running head: SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 1. Supreme Courts Nomination in the United States Name Institution

Transcription

1 Running head: SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 1 Supreme Courts Nomination in the United States Name Institution

2 SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 2 Supreme Courts Nomination in the United States The Supreme Court is considered the highest-ranking court the in the United States. It is composed of nine judges referred to as justices. The main purpose of having these justices is so that they can make rulings on cases that the junior court cannot settle. Supreme Court judges make the final decision on whether a law is consistent with the underlying constitution. All Supreme Court justices serve lifetime appointments, which means they serve until they either die or retire. According to the Constitution, as stated in Article II, it's the president's job to nominate another Supreme Court justice if the seat is declared vacant. The Senate must then go through the process of approval or rejection of the nominee, which means that at least 50% plus one of the senators must approve for the nomination to be confirmed. This process takes a few month, mostly not more than 125 days. However, there have been cases where it takes longer especially in cases where the nominee is rejected. Supreme Court vacancies can be considered as perfect political storms. Appointments are relatively boring, but the untimely passing of Justice Antonin Scalia has made this vacancy a political war venue. To begin with, Republicans hold 54 seats in the senate; this means that they have the ability to block the president's nominations. The fact that the majority wins is what makes the majority party stand strongest. Also, the current president is in his final year in office, and the Republicans hope by the coming year they will have a Republican president who makes more conservative nominations. That distinction is crucial now than ever before because Justice Scalia was one of the most conservative judges. Moreover, with Scalia included, the Supreme Court leaned on the conservative side. Some highprofile Republicans in the Senate are pushing first to have a new president before they can confirm a new appointment. This push comes from an informal rule known as THURMOND RULE' that implies no new justice appointments should be made especially by the president

3 SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 3 during the final days in the presidential office. However, the rule s application is wildly inconsistent. If the Supreme Court seat were to be left vacant for an entire year or so, it would be highly likely that more split decision would lie in the hands liberal-leaning lower courts, instead of receiving the overrules of the initially conservative-leaning Supreme Court. This move is brought about by the fact that the Supreme Court is evenly split as compared to the not so balanced Courts of Appeals. There is also an indirect problem if the seat was left vacant. If Senate refused to confirm an otherwise acceptable or popular candidate, it would affect the upcoming elections. Nine of 34 Senate seats up for re-election are close enough battles that may switch sides in the upcoming election. Six of the seats are Republican's. Notably, five Republicans votes are sufficient for the president's Supreme Court nominee to secure the position. This razor edge divide is highly likely to lead the president into having a universally palatable and moderate candidate to add pressure to the Senate. Over the next few months, the power struggle is set to have high stakes to spark a heated debate. Moreover, most interested parties are going to be posturing. Fortunately, such situations offer people many indirect influences. A comparison of former Supreme Court nominees Robert Bork and John Marshal Harlan should prove how active the process of selection, nomination and confirmation usually is. The nomination of Robert Bork came as a result of the retirement of Justice Lewis Powell on July 1, 1987, by President Reagan while that of John Marshal Harlan came as a result of the death of Robert H Jackson on January 10, 1955, by President Eisenhower. Upon nomination Robert Bork was highly criticized by people publicly declaring it such as Senator Ted Kennedy who said, Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in

4 SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 4 midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens. John Marshall Harlan II received positive public statements such from law expert Paul Freund, who said, "His thinking throws light in a very introspective way on the entire process of the judicial function. His decisions, beyond just the vote they represented, were sufficiently philosophical to be of enduring interest. He decides the case before him with that respect for its particulars, its unique features, that marks alike the honest artist and the just judge. Robert Bork was characterized as moderate whereas John Marshall Harlan II was conservative. Bork's nomination was denied by the senate as that of Harlan was accepted. Harlan worked for the second circuit during his tenure at the Court of Appeals (Totenberg, 1987). Bork used to work for the District of Columbia circuit at Court of Appeals during before his nomination. Harlan's nomination confirmation took just slightly over two months whereas it took four months to deny Bork the confirmation into the Supreme Court bench. Either way, both Robert Bork and John Marshall Harlan II had various similarities associated with their selection and nomination as opposed to the different outcomes during confirmation. Both were nominated by Republican Presidents; President Ronald Reagan and Dwight Eisenhower. Bork and Harlan both worked for The United States Court of Appeals before their nomination to be on the Supreme Court bench. Both of their nominations were delayed due to underlying issues that majority of the senators disagreed with that fueled skeptics. Harlan and Bork were both accused of the intention to desegregate the education system. In this case, Bork was accused of having a plot bar school children from being taught about evolution and, artists and writers could be censored at the unexplained desire of the Government. Harlan was accused of supporting desegregation of the civil rights and schools (Vieira, Gross, 1998).

5 SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 5 Political branches of government will always bring up raging debates over the Supreme Court's future. Especially after the demise of Justice Scalia, who brought balance to the system. The reality of splitting the remaining eight justices into 4-4 has already begun showing its complexity, and the community has already started adjusting to the current situation of not having a conservative titan. The entire process is a view of the court as another political organization. The best gift is getting a replacement which is good at interrupting and blurting questions from the liberal justices just like Justice Scalia did.

6 SUPREME COURTS NOMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES 6 References Totenberg, N. (1987). Confirmation Process and the Public: To Know Or Not To Know, The. Harv. L. Rev., 101, Vieira, N., & Gross, L. (1998). Supreme Court Appointments: Judge Bork and the Politicization of Senate Confirmations. SIU Press.