16 Comments
Barter
3/20/2017 11:44:19 am
Evaluate this process and talk about how is is or is not a useful exercise anymore.
Reply
I think that not only do the judges have to plead the Fifth to establish independence and fairness on future court cases but also to help them get approved by the Senate. Yet, while this tends to help the nominee it puts the American people at a disadvantage as they cannot be sure of where the judge will stand on issues which is especially important as this can change the courts ruling and change American policy and life until or if the Court decided to overturn the decision.
Reply
Meghan
3/23/2017 04:47:49 pm
In my opinion it's smart for the judges to plead the fifth because it could affect the outcome of their hearing. Whether or no the hearings are still valid is really a toss up in my opinion. If they keep their mouths shut we don't get a very good idea of who the nominee is, but if they talk it can effect their independence and fairness on future court cases.
Reply
Meghan
3/23/2017 05:02:32 pm
I believe that the judges keeping their mouth shut is a disadvantage for the American people. Though just because he or she keeps their mouth shut at the hearings doesn't mean we can't look into how they have ruled on cases in the past.
Reply
Yet, I do think that it not only puts the people at a disadvantage but also the political party itself because if they choose a moderate judge then they are likely to still side with the other party. This could effect major decisions and the party cannot be sure of the judges possible decisions as they plead the fifth leaving their true feeling about topics unknown.
Reply
Jesus
3/23/2017 09:26:35 pm
These hearings are still valid since they allow the Senate, and therefore the people, to judge if a candidate for the Supreme Court is qualified. Pleading the fifth is advantageous for the candidate since it gives his or her adversaries less content with which to undermine them. The hearings remain valid since the court is supposed to be non-partisan and so their stances on issues that heavily pertain to party ideology is not of utmost importance.
Reply
Jesus
3/23/2017 09:46:26 pm
The nominees staying quiet regarding their ideology hinders the citizens' rights to transparency in government. Candidates not disclosing their stances has the potential to drastically impact American policy since the way in which they would rule on certain cases would be unknown.
Reply
Jesus
3/23/2017 09:57:21 pm
In cases when there is a divided government, these cases become much more valid since the President does not have the same views as congress and so there is more pressure on the candidate to appeal to both sides of the political spectrum.
Reply
Meghan
3/23/2017 10:48:03 pm
I agree that these hearings are still valid and useful because if they're even being Nominated then we should have a general idea of their political views. Besides Supreme court justices are supposed to be non-partisan.
Reply
Caden
3/24/2017 11:04:12 am
The hearings are indeed valid, it allows for people to openly judge the candidate - even if it allows for more bias. Also, it is fair that they are able to keep privacy to themselves in order to not only make themselves more presentable but also preventing their opponents from attacking them.
Reply
Caden
3/24/2017 11:06:26 am
I agree that they should be non-partisan, and that the opinion that ties to party belief should not be included in any decision making process.
Reply
Kayla
3/24/2017 11:06:34 am
The process has had its uses in the past but it is mostly political now. It can still be used to determine how much candidates will be influenced when making their decisions. That being said, the process has become highly politicized. The questioners try to trip up the nominees and make them look bad or good depending on their party affiliation rather than focus on simply the qualifications.
Reply
Kayla
3/24/2017 11:09:11 am
Reply to Meghan--Pleading the fifth could be helpful, but it also leaves a lot of room for assumption to the public that could be dangerous for the nominee.
Reply
Caden
3/24/2017 11:09:59 am
I agree if you keep the information locked up, how will we know anything about it. What nutty situation.
Reply
Kayla
3/24/2017 11:12:25 am
It does hinder citizens ability to know what is going on in their government. That being said, the ideology of a judge should not be what their appointment is conditional on.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Archives
January 2020
Categories |