ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of The Judicial Branch

813 Words4 Pages

According to a poll conducted by Gallup, in just the past two decades, the percentage of people who approve of the way the Supreme Court conducts its job has declined from 62% to 40% (Supreme Court). The percentage of people who disapprove has increased from 29% to 58%. It is clear that many Americans today do not approve of the Supreme Court and its Justices. The changes in these percentages can be attributed to the widespread concern that Justices are not impartial. However, it is a fact that bias is within all of us, and we can not only blame the Justices. In fact, this highlights that the Judicial Branch is flawed, outdated, and needs reforms to reflect current times. Recent events and studies have shown that the Judicial Branch is not …show more content…

Currently, California uses term limits for assigning state judges. Judges can be removed by a Committee on Judicial Performance and must run for election every 6 years. The recent scandal of Justice Clarence Thomas being “treated to luxury vacations by billionaire Republican donor Harlan Crow” for over 20 years highlights the need for reform to the Supreme Court (Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From GOP Donor). This event has further damaged the public’s perception of the Supreme Court and damages the overall integrity of the Judicial Branch. As a result, the proposal of 18-year term limits for Justices have quickly gained popularity. Each president would be able to appoint two Justices during their four-year term, ensuring that each president has a chance to hopefully make the Court reflect society’s current sentiments. Former Justice Breyer has stated that “an 18-year term period would give justices enough time to fully learn the job and develop jurisprudence”, showing how a term limit would not interfere with a Justice’s line of work. However, some people argue that term limits would cause upheaval. This is simply not true. Although an 18-year term period will bring changes, decision-making will still be based on precedent and the striking down of the anti-choice law in June Medical v. Russo displays that precedent will continue to play an important role in the Justices’ rulings (The Need for Supreme Court Term Limits). Ultimately, adding term limits to the Judicial Branch will be beneficial as it restores public

Show More
Related

  • Judicial Appointments: Checks And Balances In Practice By Rachel Brand

    96 Words  | 1 Pages

    According to the article “Judicial Appointments: Checks and Balances in Practice”, written by Rachel Brand, she states that:

    Read More

  • Law Clerks In Storm Center By David O Brien

    886 Words  | 4 Pages

    As O’Brien analyzes this transition it can seem as though the modern Justices are just trying to put their work off on other people. However, this just merely scratches the surface of what’s actually going on. The growing importance of law clerks over time not only reflects the growth and expansion of the United States as a whole but also shifts in how our society functions. As a result, the Court has had to take on more responsibility, while also changing the way they approach their jobs. There is no doubt that the Supreme Court has become more institutionalized since its founding, due its growing caseload.

    Read More

  • How Did Marshall Use Marbury V Madison As Epochal

    756 Words  | 4 Pages

    The Senate failed to muster enough votes to convict and remove Chase. The precedent thus established was fortunate. From that day to this, no really serious attempt has been made to reshape the Supreme Court by the impeachment weapon. Jefferson’s ill advised attempt at “judge breaking’’ was a reassuring victory for the independence of the judiciary and for the separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government.”

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Murphy, Marshaling The Court By Khalil Franklin

    941 Words  | 4 Pages

    Thesis: “that judges, if they act rationally, must weigh all the alternatives” [see page 641]. Discussion- analysis of strategies and tactics. Assumptions made by the author; (1) historical role of a free society, has been deeply embedded in the American judiciary, (2) the

    Read More

  • How Does The Executive Branch Affect The Judicial Branch

    562 Words  | 3 Pages

    Only then will the judges be able to protect the constitution and the rights and privileges of the citizens, along with changing the minds of the framers who thought the judicial branch was weak. Hamilton emphasized that it was necessary for the judicial branch to take advantage of its power of checks and balances and make itself independent, however, still continue to work hand in hand with the

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Packing The Supreme Court

    564 Words  | 3 Pages

    Upon the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a liberal justice, McConnell saw an opportunity to put in another conservative justice, even though it was closer to the election. This hypocrisy from the Republican party is a political move for them to gain more power across the government. The Constitution does not state the number of SCOTUS justices there can be. If the President wanted, he could nominate dozens of liberal justices and have most of the Senate confirm them so that their political party could be benefited. SCOTUS was never meant to be politicized, and if it continues to be, this will create massive swings on what the law is for our country.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of President Clinton

    169 Words  | 1 Pages

    President Clinton is about to select his first nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the next few months, Governor Schaefer will get an opportunity to fill key vacancies in Maryland 's two highest courts. It 's a good time to rethink the criteria for selecting judges. The traditional vision of the ideal judge, long embraced by both the legal establishment and the public, is one who is ' 'detached ' ' and ' 'impartial. ' '

    Read More

  • The Supreme Court's Secret Power Summary

    738 Words  | 3 Pages

    The United States Supreme Court is not transparent to the citizens in this country and they fail to publicly reveal reasoning’s to their decisions that they have made. The courts non-transparency make people wonder and uncomfortable for congress has to openly show how they voted one bills Jeffrey L. Fisher razes this type of questions in his article “The Supreme Court’s Secret Power” in The New York Times he raises concern for the Supreme Court and the justice; claiming that they have become too powerful and the people of this country deserve to see how each justice vote due we entrusted them I the position and we deserve to know if they are in good favor.

    Read More

  • Term Limits In The Supreme Court

    339 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Supreme Court is an extremely important part of government. As such, we need healthy judges that are on top of their mental game. Therefore, term limits are necessary because newer judges can have a different point of view, mental health will be reduced, and the majority of Americans support term limits. If we have newer judges they will have a different point of view. In the article, Christopher stated that “It would mean a court that more accurately refers the changes and judgements of the society.”

    Read More

  • Does The Supreme Court Have Too Much Power Essay

    1226 Words  | 5 Pages

    This impacts court outcomes majorly. Along with the lengthy process of getting hired, most serve a lifetime appointment. Justices can work until death or are told otherwise. Due to this fact, the court members are very isolated from public opinion. This allows them to “apply the law with only justice in mind, and not electoral and or political concerns.”

    Read More

  • What Is The Founding Fathers Vision Of The Judicial System

    992 Words  | 4 Pages

    I believe there should be a term limit on the justices. Again, we must have a system that does not allow one or the other to be supreme power and when you do what America is doing. There is no room for growth in that area because you have the same rattled mind sets. We currently allow these judges to get so powerful that they know they must answer no one if they play the game for the wealthy and every now and then throw a bone to the public. This idea of keeping the same 9 judges on the Supreme Court for their entire life desire.

    Read More

  • Summary Of Gerald Rosenberg's Book 'The Hollow Hope'

    710 Words  | 3 Pages

    Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.

    Read More

  • Judicial Review Pros And Cons

    741 Words  | 3 Pages

    The argument alone is sufficient to see that the courts having the power of judicial review could be disastrous. Knowing that this power gives leeway for an Oligarchy to form , I still believe that it gives power for the Judiciary to provide fair and just service to us as a

    Read More

  • Why The Judicial Branch Is The Most Powerful

    478 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hana Kim Professor Yvonne Wollenberg Law and Politics 106 7 October 2015 Title In the United States government, there are three branches called the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. Out of these three, the judicial branch is the most powerful. The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court, the court with the most power in the country, and other federal courts that are lower in the system; the purpose of this branch is to look over laws and make sure they are constitutional and reasonable.

    Read More

  • Essay On Judicial Selection

    801 Words  | 4 Pages

    Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

    Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of The Judicial Branch

Open Document