Question

What should be the most important considerations when filling judge and justice positions at the federal level? Why? What factors did you take into consideration that could potentially influence judicial decision-making?

Answer 1

• When selecting judges and justice positions at the federal level the Presidentnominates candidates which are confirmed by the United States Senate which is stated by our Constitution.
• As far as qualifications go for the positions there are no specific requirements but there is a thorough background check and analysis of their qualifications conducted.
• The White House looks into each candidate’s employment history, cases litigated or opinions drafted, financial holdings and liabilities, criminal history, tax compliance, and medical examination.
• While I think that all of these categories are essential to exploring and confirming a candidate’s ability to properly perform their job, I believe that their ethical stance can be a huge influence on how they perform their judicial duties.
• There are a multitude of different factors that influence a judicial decision on the merits. It is hard to imagine that any particular list of factors can be exhaustive; the influences clearly include the facts of the case, the law, stare decisis, and the idiosyncratic characteristics of the justices.
• Other factors include self-expression (for example, of political preferences); esteem (concern for reputation and prestige), which in turn would make a judge averse to being reversed; the judges’ normative beliefs about the role that he holds (expectations that constrain judicial attitudes or direct judicial behavior); and emotional and psychological factors also come into play in influencing decisions and the exercise of discretion.
• Decision making can be bettered if judges were to rely on their own social outlook when adjudicating on the bench. Since judges were once advocates and are private citizens of the State when not acting as judges they too are affected by the decisions they make. Each time they modify a principle in the law of crime they are subject to the new principle as a private citizen.
• The only psychology that a judge should consider in his judgement, is the psychology of Parliament, a judge should ask himself what was the aim in passing such legislation, to what was Parliament reacting to and why. Only then can judicial decision making be bettered, this then affords a rejection of the use of extra-legal reasons.  
• The idiosyncratic school of thought recognises that the personality of the judge largely affected the manner in which he constructed his decision.
• Each judge’s personality differs from the other, if they could incorporate their personalities freely into constructing their judgements, then there would be little predictable pattern in the judgements so that it could be said that the ‘law may vary with the personality of the judge’.
• A further influence that affects a judge’s decision making is politics.Politics as an extra-legal reason would infringe the principle of impartiality - a judge must show at all times, not to be swayed by his political views.