Evaluate The View That The Supreme Court Appointment Process Is Ineffective.(30)

Question 1

Para 1 - Is the Appointment Process Politicised
- For: The Appointment Process is Politicised

Answer 1

• Partisan political considerations> purely judicial qualifications
• Supreme Court appointment process can be seen as politicised as it’s clear the Senate’s decisions when confirming justices are influenced by partisan political considerations rather than ensuring the nominated justice has sufficient experience and expertise
  – (Example): Obama nominating Garland in 2016 was not granted at a Senate hearing, with the Republican-controlled Senate arguing the Supreme Court’s vacancy should not be filled in an Election year - However this precedent was not followed in 2020 when Trump, backed by the same Republican- controlled Senate, successfully nominated and confirmed Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court days before the presidential election

Question 2

Para 1 - Is the appointment process politicised?
- Against: The Appointment Process is democratic

Answer 2

• President nominates justices ensuring the process is democratic, allowing the court to evolve to match how the public believes the constitution should be interpreted
  –(Example): 21st Century - US voters supported Republican President Bush and Trump, who supported conservative interpretation - wanted to appoint justices who would restrict abortion and protect the 2nd amendment
  – Dobbs v Jackson overturned Roe vs Wade, and removed the constitutional right to an abortion - can be seen as democratic changes that reflect popular will

Question 3

Para 2 - Does The Appointment Process Ensure The
Most Qualified Justices Are Appointed?
- Against; There is thorough vetting ensuring qualified candidates

Answer 3

• Nominees face the Senate Judiciary Committee, where they undergo extensive questioning on various legal and constitution matters
• (Example): Amy Coney Barrett’s hearings were focused on her judicial philosophy and past ruling, particularly on healthcare and abortion, to assess her legal approach and expertise

Question 4

Para 2 - Does The Appointment Process Ensure The
Most Qualified Justices Are Appointed?
- For: The Influence Of Politics and Other Considerations Undermines Qualified
Candidates Being Chosen

Answer 4

• President might nominate a younger justice to ensure a long-lasting impact of their appointment, even if there are older candidates with greater expertise.
  –(Example): Amy Coney Barrett’s age of 48 is relatively young and meant that her influence on Court’s decisions would extend for decades, strategic move by Trump to maintain a long-term conservative influence on the judiciary

Question 5

Para 3 - The Role of Federal Grants & Mandates
- Against: Lifetime Tenures Ensure Independence

Answer 5

• Justices are appointed for their lifetime ensures they can be fully independent knowing they’re free from immediate political backlash or concerns about job security
  – (Example): Justices of Supreme Court are appointed for life “during good behaviouir” according to constitution. This meant they generally server until they choose to retire or pass away, or impeachment for misconduct
  – Allowing SC Justices to be free to interpret the constitution in a way that is inconsistent with political priorities of Preisdent who appointed them

Question 6

Para 3 - The Role of Federal Grants & Mandates
- For: It Leads to Some presidents having a disproprotianate influence

Answer 6

• It’s unclear when SC justices have vacancies, as its often when there is a death of aj justice, the vast majority server well into their old age. - This unpredictability means that its not sure whether President appointment will have a big impact or not
  –(Example): Obama was only able to make 2 successful appointments to Supreme Court despite 8 years in Office, Trump made 3 appointments in 4 years
• This allowed Trump to have a greater impact on compositition of the court, including abortion rights which reflected conservative interpretation