![]() |
|
Debating with the enemy Discuss politics, current events, and other hot button issues here. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
Re: Supreme Court vacancy
Quote:
(Strictly speaking, under Article II, section 2 of the Constitution, Supreme Court justices are appointed by the President "by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate," not other judges.)
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,698
|
Re: Supreme Court vacancy
Quote:
So, if a lawyer in a department is leaving, and the boss wants that lawyer's opinion on who might be a good replacement, is that ethically wrong to ask? Would you assume sinister intent if you were asked? |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
Contains football related knowledge
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Second Star On The Right
Age: 62
Posts: 10,401
|
Re: Supreme Court vacancy
Quote:
However, a Supreme Court justice is not an employee of the President but rather a member of a separate and equal branch of the government. Does that make it inherently ethically wrong? No. Do I think its good practice? No. Does it have the potential to create unnecessary entanglements of justices in the political process? Yes. Think about it ... do we want justices lobbying presidents cutting side deals during elections or with sitting Presidents? "You know ... if I retire, you could appoint my successor. Oh by the way, I hear there is a nice little ambassadorship opening up in the Caribbean. If I can't get that, I might as well stay on the bench." I realize that's pretty cynical and hyperbole but it's not a path we want to start down.
__________________
Strap it up, hold onto the ball, and let’s go. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Living Legend
Join Date: Aug 2008
Age: 58
Posts: 21,698
|
Re: Supreme Court vacancy
Quote:
Nominating a new SC Justice is the one case in all of our constitution (I think) where the executive branch and the legislative branch, through advise and consent, get to bring politics directly into the SC. If it can be headed off by asking a well respected moderate justice who they think would be the ideal replacement, I would take that 50 times out of 50, over the political side show that is about to ensue. Last edited by CRedskinsRule; 07-11-2018 at 05:31 PM. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|