October, 19 2012
What are the consequences, both good and bad, of presidential appointment of federal judges? Is this the right process, or should judges be elected by the people?
There are many good and bad consequences of presidential appointment of federal judges. However, this current policy is very unfair; it is essential to keep a balanced amount of political parties within the supreme court. It seems as though the current policy can be used to create an advantage for the president and his political party. Our supreme court should not be one-dimensional meaning that there needs to be more of a balance between democrats and republicans. I believe that the federal judges should be elected by the people because it would provide more of a balance of political views in the Supreme Court so that rational decisions can be made based on an input from various issues on a national level.
Presidential appointment of federal judges has many good consequences too it. From the presidents stand point he has the advantage of surrounding himself with most of his political party within the Supreme Court. This in turn can help the president undergo the duties he has promised to the American people. It is often very difficult for the President to pass bills or laws because it has to be approved by the Supreme Court but if the president appoints people who he knows will give him a majority vote his policies will be passed. There are many current problems that need to be resolved and by the president passing more bills it will resolve more of these problems. Also,
Not only can presidential appointment bring some good consequences, but it also can bring among plenty of bad consequences. More common than not, the federal judges that the president appoints will convey bad long term consequences, this is due to the fact that all the federal judges are appointed to lifetime positions. Since the decision is so crucial to the future of...