Relative independence of the UK and US judiciaries

Question 1

Judicial independence

Answer 1

• UK and US systems both encourage judicial independence, meaning that judges are free from any external pressure or interference
• This should allow them to make decisions solely based on law and to hold members of govt to account
• The judiciaries are structurally and hyscially independent from the other two branches of govt allowing them to rule against the govt if they see fit

Question 2

Judical politicisation

Judicial politicisation

Answer 2

A situation where judges are drawn into politics. This comporomises with their neutrality as guardians of the law

Question 3

Judicial politicisation

Politicised courts

Answer 3

• In the USA, the ability of presidents to appoint liberal or conservative justices means the SC has a political leaning. A rep president is less likely to be challenged by a conservative court, doesnt happen in the UK as judges rule on a narrower basis
• Most political decison, Bush v Gore (2000), the Conservative majority Court ruled 5-4 against an election recount in Florida, a decision that made Bush president
• There are several pieces of evidence to suggest that politically appointed judges can act independently:

1. President has no influence over them once they’re appointed
2. Jusitices may rule against political interest of politcians who appointed them, e.g. Kavanaugh against Trump in Trump v Vance (2020)
3. Two of the dissenting justices in Bush v Gore were rep appointees, who became liberal