Question

analyze the process by which U.S. judges are nominated and confirmed. Does this seem like a fair process? What extent does it have on the political lean of the Court, and therefore, on United States law (specifically civil rights and civil liberties)? Cite specific examples. Consider the concepts of judicial activism and judicial restraint in your response

Answer 1

Federal judges in the United States are nominated by the President and the Executive branch of the government and then confirmed by the Senate. The process could be more fair if judges were elected into their positions like they are in some states. The reason that they are not elected has become dated with time. In theory, judges are appointed to ensure that the highest quality candidate is elected into office which would result in the best possible interpretations of the laws passed by Congress. This process would have been fair in the past where candidates and information about them would have been very difficult for the average person but in today's society anyone can research a candidate. It is not the most fair process because it turns judicial nominations into a political event. Judges are supposed to be independent of political parties but they are nominated by a President who is a representative from a political party. They have political leanings and select judges that have a history of interpreting the Constitution in ways that align with their political leanings. Different interpretations can have a huge impact on civil liberties and civil rights rights depending on the case presented to federal judges. The political leanings of the President can find their way into the courts in this way and play in a role in those decisions. Right now, the Supreme Court has a conservative leaning which means that they have a very strict reading of the Constitution. A liberal leaning would mean there is more room for interpretation and that the Constitution was meant to adapt with the times. These different interpretations can have a positive or negative impact on civil rights and liberties and have had both throughout history.