Is The SC Too Political

Question 1

How is the SC too political? - 1

Answer 1

-nomination + confirmation process of justices is highly politicised

Question 2

How is the nomination process politicised?

Answer 2

-pres nominates justice for life when another dies, retires or is impeached followed by a sentence confirmation
-selection influences by their political ideology as tend to choose nominee whose philosophy’s align with own political views

Question 3

What is an example of this?

Answer 3

-Trump nominated Gorsuch, Kavanaugh + Barrett as cons justices amounting in Repub dominated SC
-wanted shape court to advance cons values on issues like abortion + gun rights - e.g. overturned Roe v Wade 2022 former SC landmark ruling 1973

Question 4

What is the argument against this? - 1

Answer 4

-justices are independent and free from political influence once appointed

Question 5

What does this mean?

Answer 5

-pres ability influence them ends once appointed as cannot be removed for making a judgement that is not aligned with what pres believes

Question 6

What is an example of this?

Answer 6

-Trump nominees Gorsuch + Kavanaugh judged in Trump v Vance 2020 + Trump v Mazars 2020 that Trump didn’t have absolute right withhold his tax returns + financial record from investigation

Question 7

What is another argument for the SC being too politicised? - 2

Answer 7

-the court has been criticised for acting as ‘third house of the legislature’ by effectively making rather than interpreting the law

Question 8

How is this evident?

Answer 8

-has become a ‘quasi-legislative body’

Question 9

What do strict constructionist argue about this? - with examples

Answer 9

-constitution doesn’t mention abortion or same sex marriage + farmers no intention authorising it when wrote the constitution
-condemn justices involved in Roe v Wade 1973 + Obergefell v Hodges 2016 ‘for legislating from the bench’

Question 10

What is the counter to this? - 2

Answer 10

-Congress acts as a check on an overly political SC
-could initiate constitutional amendment to overturn courts decisions - prevent legislating from the bench by overturning the decisions/laws made

Question 11

What is an example of this?

Answer 11

-23rd amendment 1961
-before this US states could only participate in electoral college + as a federal district DC had no voting representation in EC

Question 12

What did the SC rule in 1963? - 2

Answer 12

-Gray v Sanders reinforced ‘one person, one vote’ ensuring voters had equal representations
-but ruling didn’t apply to DC as no representation in EC

Question 13

What was the Congressional response? - 2

Answer 13

-granted DC right to vote in pres elections by providing electoral votes
-Congress used authority to override SC interpretation of the constitution and so doesn’t have full power to legislate

Question 14

How else is the US SC politicised? - 3

Answer 14

-the unelected SC can make important changes to the most controversial areas of public policy

Question 15

How can the SC do this?

Answer 15

-through judicial review with landmark rulings like Obergefell v Hodges 2015
-court has also intervened in the electoral process

Question 16

How did the SC intervene in the pres election of 2000 using judicial review?

Answer 16

-2000 election very close it depended on Florida EC votes between W.Bishop + Gore
-Florida SC ordered manual recount in certain counties - decisions Bush appealed to US SC

Question 17

What did the court rule?

Answer 17

-5-4 in Bush v Gore 2000 that recount was unconstitutional- controversial decision as it decided the general election with Bush as president by 271 to 266 EC votes
-all cons justices voted for Bush + all lib justices voted against

Question 18

What is a counter to this arg? - 3

Answer 18

-for the constitution to remain relevant the court must apply it to modern areas of public policy even if it’s controversial

Question 19

Why must the court do this?

Answer 19

-to show the constitution is adaptable to the expansion of rights including abortion in Roe v Wade + ethnic rights e.g. Brown v Board of Education 1954 on racial segregation in schools