Supreme Court

[keith]

So the current process has got me thinking......

What do you feel are the fundamental obligations or responsibilities of a President appointing a justice to the Supreme Court. Is it to maintain the status quo or balance of the court, is it to "move" the court in a particular political or social direction, is it to choose the best possible jurist available, is it to change the composition of the court to reflect that of society, is it all of the above or something else?

Is Judge Sotomayor the creme of the crop - the best available or something else?

Discuss.

Keith

[hickoryhouse]

The job of the Supreme Court is to determine the constitutionality of any given court decision or Congressional made law. The differences of experience and opinions of the judges make it an evolving ocurt however i feel that the original intent of the court is to do nothing but determine if a decision or law is constitutional.

[UNT90]

Theoretically? To apply the law. Not to interpret, but to apply. Unfortunately, the court has become politicized over the years.

[CMJ]

The court has always been politicized to some degree. Look at Jefferson bitching about its power.

[FirefightnRick]

is it to "move" the court in a particular political or social direction,

Slowly but surely.

As MRL writes:

....in the 1930's, during the Great Depression, the Statists successfully launched a counterrevolution that radically and fundamentally altered the nature of American society. President Franklin Roosevelt and an overwhelmingly Democratic Congress, through an array of federal projects, entitlements, taxes, and regulations known as the New Deal, breached the Constitution's firewalls. At first the Supreme Court fought back, striking down New Deal programs as exceeding the limits of federal constitutional authority, violation state sovereignty, and trampling on private property rights. But rather than seek an expansion of federal power through the amendment process, which would likely have blunted Roosevelt's ambitions, Roosevelt threatened the very makeup of the Court by proposing to pack it with sympathetic justices who would go along with his counterrevolution. Although Roosevelt's plan failed, the justices had been effectively intimidated. And new justices, who shared Roosevelt's statism, began replacing older justices on the Court. It was not long before the Court became little more than a rubber stamp for Roosevelt's policies.

The federal government began passing laws and creating administrative agencies at a dizzying pace, increasing its control over economic activity and, hence, individual liberty. It used taxation not merely to fund constitutionally legitimate governmental activities, but also to redistribute wealth, finance welfare programs, set prices and production limits, create huge public works programs, and establish pension and unemployment programs. Roosevelt used his new power to expand political alliances and create electoral constituencies----union, farmers, senior citizens, and ethnic groups. From this era forward, the Democratic Party and the federal government would become inextricably intertwined, and the Democratic Party would become as dependent on federal power for its sustenance as the governmental dependents it would create. Ironically, industrial expansion resulting from World War II eventually ended the Great Depression, not the New Deal. Indeed, the enormous tax and regulatory burden imposed on the private sector by the New Deal prolonged the economic recovery.

The significance of the New Deal is not in any one program, but in its sweeping break from our founding principles and constitutional limitations. Roosevelt himself broke with the two presidential-term tradition started by George Washington by running for four terms. His legacy includes a federal government that has become a massive, unaccountable conglomerate: It is the nation's largest creditor, debtor, lender, employer, consumer, contractor, grantor, property owner, tenant, insurer, health-care provider, and pension guarantor.

And yet, the Statist has an insatiable appetite for control. His sights are set on his next meal even before he has fully digested his last. He is constantly agitating for government action. And in furtherance of that purpose, the Statist speaks in the tongue of the demagogue, concocting one pretext and grievance after another to manipulate public perceptions and build popular momentum for the divestiture of liberty and property from its rightful possessors. The industrious, earnest, and successful are demonized as perpetrators of various offenses against the public good, which justifies governmental intervention on behalf of an endless parade of "victims." In this way, the perpetrator and the victim are subordinated to the government's authority---the former by outright theft, the latter by a dependent existence. in truth, both are made victims by the real perpetrator, the Statist.

Rick

Edited July 16, 2009 by FirefightnRick

[UNTflyer]

The question is what is the President's job in appointing a justice...

#1 - To ensure the strength of America judicial system by appointing the best judges

#2 - To move the court towards his ideological spectrum