- Created by: Q_
- Created on: 07-04-19 21:23
Criticisms of appointment/confirmation process
- Presidents have tended to politicise the nominations by attempting to choose justices who share their political views and judicial philosophy.
- Senate has tended to politicise the confirmation process by focusing more on 'litmus test issues' such as abortion than on qualifications and suitability for the job (opposing the UK Supreme Court where judges are appointed based on meritocracy alone).
- Members of the Sente Judiciary Committee (SJC) from the president's party tend to ask soft questions of the nominee.
- Members of the SJC from the opposition party attempt to attach or embarras the nominee through their questions, rather than elicit relevant information. 'Advise and consent' has been replaced by 'search and destroy.'
- Justices are freely confirmed by party-line votes.
- The media conduct a 'feeding frenzy' often connected with matters of little relevance to the nominee's judicial qualifications.
1 of 1
Similar Government & Politics resources: