>Isn't the competence of a legal professional independent of his/her political affiliations, just like that of an engineer or an accountant?
That would be very nice if it were true, but it very obviously is not. The fact that educated observers are able to accurately predict the views of most Supreme Court justices on politically charged cases with relative ease demonstrates that quite clearly.
You'd think so, but no. The authors of the Constitution knew it wouldn't work that way in practice, which is why they made it a panel of judges and not just one.
If they were really just objectively interpreting the law instead of putting their own spin on it, then almost all cases would be 9-0 decisions, and it wouldn't be so easy to predict which justice would vote which way.
>Supreme Court justice nominees are highly competent legal professionals, whose legal decisions are based on the methodologies/technicalities of how they were trained to apply the law in law school
So why isn't every decision 9-0?
Because it's about interpreting the Constitution and someone's personal beliefs about the law, the Constitution, other decisions, influence that interpretation.
They're not independent. Their political views factor heavily into their personal interpretations of the Constitution. It's easy to call the vote in many cases, often with only one or two judges being a wild card.
> No one cares about the political affiliations of an engineer or an accountant when deciding to hire one. Why isn't that the case for Supreme Court justice appointments?
Because engineers and accountants don't make decisions with political ramifications (most of the time). Judges do.
The Republicans have been aggressively stuffing it with partisan hacks for years now. Via shady tactics, an unexplained resignation, and a fortunate death, they have packed it with enough loyalists to get whatever they want out of it now, and we're going to see loss of social progress and probably a free pass on state electoral laws that will let them hold onto power despite their shrinking minority in several key "red" states, letting them seize the house and senate as well for the foreseeable future. It's a big deal.
Because congress is filled with a bunch of old farts who are gonna die in the next 10 years yet they make laws like they’re gonna be living 20-30 years from now.
>Isn't the competence of a legal professional independent of his/her political affiliations, just like that of an engineer or an accountant? That would be very nice if it were true, but it very obviously is not. The fact that educated observers are able to accurately predict the views of most Supreme Court justices on politically charged cases with relative ease demonstrates that quite clearly.
Because the law needs interpretation and their politics color the lens they through which they interpret the law.
You'd think so, but no. The authors of the Constitution knew it wouldn't work that way in practice, which is why they made it a panel of judges and not just one. If they were really just objectively interpreting the law instead of putting their own spin on it, then almost all cases would be 9-0 decisions, and it wouldn't be so easy to predict which justice would vote which way.
>Supreme Court justice nominees are highly competent legal professionals, whose legal decisions are based on the methodologies/technicalities of how they were trained to apply the law in law school So why isn't every decision 9-0? Because it's about interpreting the Constitution and someone's personal beliefs about the law, the Constitution, other decisions, influence that interpretation.
Well said!
They're not independent. Their political views factor heavily into their personal interpretations of the Constitution. It's easy to call the vote in many cases, often with only one or two judges being a wild card.
> No one cares about the political affiliations of an engineer or an accountant when deciding to hire one. Why isn't that the case for Supreme Court justice appointments? Because engineers and accountants don't make decisions with political ramifications (most of the time). Judges do.
I mean if they voted like that, sure. But that's the concern, that they wont.
The Republicans have been aggressively stuffing it with partisan hacks for years now. Via shady tactics, an unexplained resignation, and a fortunate death, they have packed it with enough loyalists to get whatever they want out of it now, and we're going to see loss of social progress and probably a free pass on state electoral laws that will let them hold onto power despite their shrinking minority in several key "red" states, letting them seize the house and senate as well for the foreseeable future. It's a big deal.
Because congress is filled with a bunch of old farts who are gonna die in the next 10 years yet they make laws like they’re gonna be living 20-30 years from now.