Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > Political Forums > Civil Rights & Abortion
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Civil Rights & Abortion Discuss Misunderstanding the Role of Judges at the Political Forums; by Deborah O'Malley In his recent endorsement of Barack Obama, Colin Powell mused: "I would have difficulty with two more ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-10-2010, 05:32 PM
MrLiberty's Avatar
professional curmudgeon
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 24,745
Thanks: 14,594
Thanked 13,710 Times in 9,094 Posts
Default Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Quote:
by Deborah O'Malley

In his recent endorsement of Barack Obama, Colin Powell mused: "I would have difficulty with two more conservative appointments to the Supreme Court, but that's what we'd be looking at in a McCain administration."

While Powell is correct in highlighting the importance of judicial issues in the upcoming election, his comments reveal an all-too-common misunderstanding of the role of judges. Rather than scrutinizing judicial nominees based on their perceived political leanings, the next president should appoint judges who apply the law regardless of their own policy preferences.

Because six members of the Court will be age 69 or older when the next president is inaugurated, it's likely that multiple vacancies will occur during the next administration. This will create a rare opportunity for the next president to alter the direction of the High Court for the next several decades. It's crucial, therefore, to have a president who understands the judiciary's proper role. As Ronald Reagan once noted, "[The Founders] knew that the courts, like the Constitution itself, must not be liberal or conservative." For Reagan and for the Founders, judges were to be selected based on their ability to put political preferences aside and interpret the Constitution and laws based on their original meaning.

This proper understanding of the courts stands in direct contrast with Powell's statement, which seems to assume both that McCain would appoint conservatives, and that Obama would appoint non-conservatives of some ilk.

Indeed, a great problem on the Court is that some judges don't meet this ideal. They readily admit that their personal preferences and experiences play a pivotal role in judicial decision-making.

For example, in a death penalty case this year, Justice Anthony Kennedy considered his "own experience" when interpreting the Eighth Amendment. As Judge Robert Bork noted at a recent Heritage event, Kennedy has made the frightening assertion that judges have the "opportunity to shape the destiny of the country" -- a startling reflection of Justice Kennedy's infatuation with his own aggrandized power.

Yet it is clear that Americans do not want the personal opinions of nine unelected judges "shaping" their destiny. A recent survey conducted by the Polling Company on behalf of the Federalist Society found that a whopping 71 percent of likely Ohio voters want the next president to nominate Supreme Court justices who will "interpret and apply the law as it is written and not take into account their own viewpoints and experiences."

Given the clear importance of judicial nominations in the next administration -- and keeping in mind Reagan's admonition, which seemingly comports with recent polling data -- it's worthwhile to review where the candidates come down on this important issue.

Barack Obama, who opposed the nominations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, has repeatedly stated that his primary criteria for selecting judges will be whether they have "heart" and "empathy" when deciding difficult constitutional cases. His decision to vote against Roberts was based on his own displeasure with what was "in the judge's heart," though he admitted to having "no doubt" in his mind that Judge Roberts was "qualified to sit on the highest court of the land" and had the correct "comportment and temperament."

Obama's frequent invocation of "heart," particularly as he has discussed it as relevant in cases addressing abortion, affirmative action, gay rights, and rights of the disabled, would seem to suggest that he values the "viewpoint" and "experience" factors that those polled in Ohio reject.

John McCain has promised to appoint judges who will respect their limited constitutional role and leave policy decisions to the democratic process. However, questions remain. In the final presidential debate, he defended his role in the controversial Gang of Fourteen, a bipartisan group of senators who reached a compromise that, while permitting a vote on some of President Bush's federal court nominees, abandoned the prospect of votes for several others and preserved the ability of the Senate minority to invoke an unprecedented use of the filibuster.

That said, McCain did demonstrate that his understanding of the judicial role differs from Powell's. Adding disapproval to the "conservative judges" nomenclature, he chastised Obama for wrongly taking into account political ideology: "You chose not to [join] because you were afraid of the appointment of, quote, 'conservative judges.'"

The next president has the historic opportunity to restore the judiciary to its constitutional role and thus preserve the rule of law in America for generations to come. This can be done only if he, like Reagan, appoints judges based not on whether they are "liberal" or "conservative," but whether they will faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of this nation, free from personal bias.
Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Since we are already arguing whether the Constitution is a living document and some here believe it is and that judges can change it I thought I would post something that goes to the heart of what is wrong in the way we pick judges for the Supreme Court!
__________________
I see a whole army of my countrymen, here in defiance of tyranny. You've come to fight as free men... and free men you are. What will you do with that freedom?

William Wallace
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-10-2010, 05:53 PM
dabateman's Avatar
Common Sense-Common Good
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15,625
Thanks: 2,051
Thanked 8,181 Times in 4,773 Posts
Default Re: Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrLiberty View Post
Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Since we are already arguing whether the Constitution is a living document and some here believe it is and that judges can change it I thought I would post something that goes to the heart of what is wrong in the way we pick judges for the Supreme Court!
Wow... so the heritage society has a stance on what they believe judges should do... surprise surprise. The problem is that they live in lalala land if they believe that crap. No matter how much a judge may try to avoid his or her personal opinions, they will always creep up. It's just human nature. In addition, applying the document as written can often violate the intent of the law. Congress isn't good about writing law in an effective manner and so the judges are left cleaning up the mess...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Cash
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dabateman For This Useful Post:
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-10-2010, 07:06 PM
saltwn's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: in the natural state
Posts: 55,223
Thanks: 40,465
Thanked 20,567 Times in 14,299 Posts
Send a message via Yahoo to saltwn
Default Re: Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Quote:
"interpret and apply the law as it is written and not take into account their own viewpoints and experiences."
Well yeah that is what their job is duh
How they interpret is another story.
For my part I think the present majority (on the corporations case) misunderstand their own jobs.
__________________
"The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history."
-George Orwell
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-10-2010, 09:42 PM
Spencer Collins's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: East Of Eden
Gender: Male
Posts: 19,105
Thanks: 17,367
Thanked 11,535 Times in 7,565 Posts
Default Re: Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Quote:
Originally Posted by dabateman View Post
Congress isn't good about writing law in an effective manner and so the judges are left cleaning up the mess...
Exactly....legislators should labor to ensure that there is little doubt as to the intent and limitations of the laws they enact.That is more time consuming but ultimately less problematic.Legislation from the bench or the (perception) of legislation from the bench is often caused by poorly written legislation.
__________________
"Clowns to the left of me,Jokers to the right, here I am,Stuck in the middle with you"
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-10-2010, 09:59 PM
dabateman's Avatar
Common Sense-Common Good
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 15,625
Thanks: 2,051
Thanked 8,181 Times in 4,773 Posts
Default Re: Misunderstanding the Role of Judges

Quote:
Originally Posted by Spencer Collins View Post
Exactly....legislators should labor to ensure that there is little doubt as to the intent and limitations of the laws they enact.That is more time consuming but ultimately less problematic.Legislation from the bench or the (perception) of legislation from the bench is often caused by poorly written legislation.
Right... This is ultimately the problem in the current system. We are in a situation where the judges are FORCED to act. If the law is messy, it's their job to sort it out and try to make it work. What's surprising, is that for a whole bunch of lawyers the congress certainly has made a mess of writing law. Well that shouldn't be surprising... job security, but still, it goes against what my idea of being a great jurist should be.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Cash
You build on failure. You use it as a stepping stone. Close the door on the past. You don't try to forget the mistakes, but you don't dwell on it. You don't let it have any of your energy, or any of your time, or any of your space.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
judges, misunderstanding, role, the

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0