Justice Law : A Research Paper On Supreme Court Justice

In Supreme Conflict, Jan Crawford Greenburg provides insightful analysis and assessment of the politics surrounding the Supreme Court appointment process of Justices during the Rehnquist Court. Despite having seven conservative nominees the Rehnquist Court was deeply disappointing to those conservatives hoping to reverse decades of progressive rulings on key social issues. Throughout the book Greenburg describes both positive and negative appointments and nominations such as Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas, and David Souter. Greenburg also includes some background on the impact the Warren and Berger Courts had on the Rehnquist and later Roberts Courts.

“Justice is not to be taken by storm. She is to be wooed by slow advances. Substitute statute for decision, and you shift the center of authority, but add no quota of inspired wisdom.” —— Benjamin N. Cardozo[1]. In the view of many citizens, Supreme Court Justices are like legal machines, interpreting constitution to promise American people of equal justice. Throughout American history, numerous case laws have established the pattern of judicial decisions of U.S., thus making little room for new legislation. However, even Supreme Court Justices are human beings, who can be influenced by various factors. It’s not that simple to determine the inclination of a justice to his or her religious belief, political philosophy and ideology. The essence of judicial process requires a justice to vote under any circumstance based on law, precedents and most important, constitution. No Supreme Court Justice will say that he or she has personal or political

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was sworn into the Supreme Court on September 26, 1986 and was nominated by President Ronald Reagan. He took the place of Associate Justice William H. Renquist when Renquist was sworn in as Chief Justice. Justice Antonin Scalias' political affiliation is Republican. Justice Antonin started his career as a commercial lawyer for a brief period. He then taught Law at The University of Virginia. After about 4 years of teaching he went into government service starting under President Nixon and then President Ford. During President Carters reign, Justice Antonin left government service to go back to teaching law. He went back into government service under President Reagans administration and was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. Justice Antonin Scalia attended Georgetown University and graduated as the Valedictorian of his class. He then went on to attend and graduate from Harvard Law School. He is married and had nine children.

The United States president, Barack Obama, nominated a longtime federal judge Merrick Garland to take the position of the Supreme Court and replace the former justice, Antonin Scalia. Merrick Garland’s past decisions related to different issues had made him the talk of the town. Although Garland has a 19 year record on the U.S. court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, this does not lend him to a fast evaluation (Mcshane).

Our judicial branch is essential in the function of our current government and to make valid the constitutional rights of every citizen. In additional, the judicial branch has is established to make sure there is balance of power within the executive and the legislative branches. With this in mind and being a citizen of this country is important to know that the head of the judicial branch is a person that is well prepared and educated to make a rightful a judgement always. Correspondingly, is important to learn who the current Justices of the Supreme Court are and what are their qualifications. Recently, due to a given school assignment I was able to read more and learn more about our current Chief Justice of the United States and the Associate

When the Founding Fathers constructed up the Constitution, they made it very clear that there would be three distinct branches of the government. These three branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, would all play different roles and have to work together in order to make our country run. While the legislative and executive branches clearly uphold a representative democracy, it has been argued that the judicial branch, containing only unelected officers does not, failing to be anything close to democratic. Even though the Judicial Branch is the least democratic, it plays a vital role in preserving democracy.

On September 12, 2012, a for-profit corporation, by the name of Hobby Lobby, sued the Secretary of Department of Health and Human Services, who at the time was Kathleen Sebelius. The Green family, owner of Hobby Lobby store incorporated, sued due to a mandate known as the Patient Care and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). Therefore, this act mandated that businesses must provide contraceptives to employees under their insurance benefits. However, contraceptives were against the Green family’s religious faith, so they denied their employees contraceptives in their insurance benefit plans. Later on, the Green family sued under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, stating that this was an infringement

Neil Gorsuch was sworn in as a Supreme Court Justice on April 10, 2017. Since then, he has ruled on a variety of cases such as the California gun law, LGBT rights, Trump’s travel ban, and use of taxpayer money for Religious schools. His rulings have fallen on the conservative side. A good Justice has integrity, is educated, has experience, and is virtuous. Neil Gorsuch may display those qualities of a suitable Justice, but his rulings are biased from his beliefs. A Justice should plainly interpret the law, not add their own point of view. The Justice President Trump appointed, Neil Gorsuch, does have the education and experience of an exceptional judge, but his conservative values hinder his ability to express fair rulings in cases.

The government was forcing them to provide four specific potentially life-terminating drugs and devices through their medical insurance coverage. This went against their religious belief that life begins at conception. They had no issue with the approved preventive contraceptives, only the ones that would terminate a pregnancy after conception. In September 2012, the Greens filed suit to defend their religious freedoms. In June 2013, the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld their religious beliefs and that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act protected them from these mandates. In October 2013, the federal government pushed the Supreme Court to look into the case. The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case and it was presented on March 25, 2014. On June 30, 2014, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Greens giving them the right to refuse offering the life-terminating drugs and devices (becketfund.org). This victory proved that the government was trying to push something that they had no right to push and someone stepped up to take action.

Hobby Lobby Stores is a chain arts and crafts store around the nation. The owners, which is the Green Family, based a lot the their business and primary rules of their Christian faith. They have filed a court case to not provide birth contraception for their employee’s benefits for health. They feel birth contraception is unmoral and goes against their religion, which is what bases their crafts store. The Greens sued Kathleen Sebelius, who is the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, on September 12, 2012 for the requirements of providing birth contraception. The court allowed their request of not providing this benefit to Hobby Lobby’s employees.

These are just a few of the assumptions that are not supported by evidence in this article. The suppression of evidence is throughout due to the things said about him from other people that have interpreted his actions and formed an opinions of him because they don’t want him to be nominated. Some of the language that Mr. Hananel uses to prejudge Gorsuch is in the remarks about his decision concerning the 13-year-old. He says his powerful dissent in the case last year offers a glimpse of how Gorsuch – a favorite among conservatives – might be hard to pigeonhole on criminal justice issues, if he is confirmed to the Supreme Court. He has also used words like generally, likely to make assumptions of what he has done and will do if he is nominated. From the entire article, I don’t think what was implied about Gorsuch, not being a good candidate, leads to the editor’s conclusion. He seems like a logical man that wants to follow the law and be fair in administering it. This article at times seems to contradict what Mrs. Hananel is saying about Gorsuch through what Gorsuch has said or possibly done. The editor would have us to believe Gorsuch is not a good candidate for the Supreme Court. He used reasoning when it came to the 13-year-old, in saying the police officer went too far in arresting him and that there is a difference between childish pranks and more seriously

"The Supreme Court is the guardian of its own integrity" (Boston Globe) As Americans, we desire for our Supreme Court Justices to distance themselves from emotional decisions and to not allow politics to influence their decisions. Realistically, when it comes to judicial decision making, the Supreme Court uses three different approaches to making their decisions, while hopefully staying true to their own integrity. The three models used when studying how decisions are made by the Supreme Court are the legal model, the attitudinal model, and the strategic model. Those interpreting the law refer to the Constitution, which provides well-guided direction, but is vague and much of the law making is left to the interpretation of our judges. We entrust that the best legal decisions will be made by our nine Supreme Court justices.

The New York Times column relates to Chapter 4, 11, and 14 because it deals with a Supreme Court nomination. Gorsuch served as a clerk for David B. Sentelle in the United States COURT OF APPEALS for the D.C. Circuit and a judge in the COURT OF APPEALS for the Tenth Circuit. He is taking the CONSERVATIVE seat for Justice Antonin Scalia. Gorsuch was sworn into court after a long FILIBUSTER by Senate Democrats.

The federal court system has several main levels. District courts (The thin court) , circuit courts which are the first level to appeal, and Supreme Court of the United States. Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear cases authorized by the United States constitution or federal status. The primary difference for civil case is the types of cases that can be heard in the federal system.

There is a proverb that says, “Don’t fix what isn’t broke.” This statement is very likely as true as it is old. But what happens when something is dysfunctional? The ‘something’ in question is the coveted seat of the Supreme Court Justice, which many should know is not a position that is obtained from the amazingly widespread routine of elections. Not to let out any spoilers if you were not aware, the President is the nominator of Justices to these associate positions and the Senate is the deciding group with a majority vote. I agree with the practice, currently instated because of our Constitution, but can see how some people worry over its effectiveness. There has been one case where a standing Supreme Court Justice has been impeached.