- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,130
- Reaction score
- 58,863
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
When you say "fix", did you mean that in a Bush kind of way? :lol:
I think someone with a background other than a judge would be refreshing. Justices from all sorts of backgrounds have gone on to be effective at their job.
I normally would agree with you
but using Obama's standards concerning the far more qualified Roberts and Alito the answer is no
Why do Obama's personal standards when he was a senator have anything to do with Elena Kagan?
Experience needed? The long history of nonjudge justices.
Nearly half of justices had no prior experience on the bench.
John Marshall is widely revered as "the great Chief Justice," but before joining the Supreme Court in 1801 he had never served a day in judicial robes and lost the only case he argued at the high court.
Earl Warren had worked for 18 years as a prosecutor and was three times elected governor of California. But he had no prior judicial experience. Nor did William Rehnquist, Felix Frankfurter, and Louis Brandeis.
...
Lewis Powell, Abe Fortas, and Brandeis were all lawyers with no judicial experience at the time of their nominations.
Newsflash: 41 of the 109 US Supreme Court Justices had no prior judicial experience.
Full list here.
It's all part of the same package if we're being honest. She will have to learn protocol and probably won't care as long as she can get a few brownie points for whatever agenda she happens to carry, which is yet another concern, we don't know where her core is on most of the issues and it sounds horrid when we look at the general area.Alot of you seem worried about her lack of experiance.
That's not the main issue as I see it.
It's what her apparent positions are on the various issues that may come before the SCOTUS that put me off of supporting her nomination.
Yes, but they would have to commit a high crime. They are subject to Impeachment and conviction. One justice was removed in 1805- Samuel Chase by the house. Article is here: Supreme Court of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaIs there any way to remove a SCOTUS member?
Short of their resignation?
I have never heard of it happening, but then I have little knowledge of the SCTOUS history.
I say no. She basically has no experience as a judge. The fact that she required the Study of International and Foreign Law but not U.S. Constitutional Law as a Harvard dean proves that she does not give a rats ass about the constitution.
I voted no due to lack of judicial experience.
No, I don't think she will interpret "The Constitution" as written, so that pretty much disqualifies her from my pool of applicants.
I am guessing that Roberts would claim that Stevens doesn't interpret the Constitution as written and that Stevens would claim that Roberts doesn't interpret the Constitution as written. It's all in how you view the Constitution.
Well, it's not hard to understand.
The Constitution is supposed to be the highest law of the land, not a generalized set of guidelines that we can blur, whenever we feel like it.
If it is not hard to understand, why is it so many judges don't understand it?
Politicization, personal morality, social stereotypes etc.
Each judge represents a political/moral agenda to some degree.
Many hold social stereotypes about things, that override their duty to uphold The Constitution.
If it is not hard to understand, why is it so many judges don't understand it?
Politicization, personal morality, social stereotypes etc.
Each judge represents a political/moral agenda to some degree.
Many hold social stereotypes about things, that override their duty to uphold The Constitution.
On the other hand, if Judges don't understand it, perhaps they shouldn't be Judges.
But you (and anyone who agrees with you) are able to be bias-free and objective about how to interpret the Constitution?
Seems more likely that your "not hard to understand" is not agreed to by a lot of people with a lot more knowledge on the subject than you.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?