Judges are those individuals to whom are charged with the responsibility of interpreting and making decisions in a Court of Law. Those decisions must be based on the Constitution of the United States and the laws set forth by Congress or the local state legislature. Judges, or Justices, must be able to interpret the law, the Constitution, and other matters in a fair and impartial way. The Constitution provides that (federal) judges and justices may be nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress. What is more interesting is that the Constitution does not provide any guidelines at all for selecting judges and justices. They are chosen based on experience, political ideology, party ...view middle of the document...
Federal judges serve for life, however, they may be removed through impeachment, just as the President would.
The President, and only the President, holds the responsibility and has full discretion of nominating judges to Congress based on the United States Constitution. The Constitution only provides broad parameters for selecting judges. Many vacancies do occur during a President’s term, therefore nominating judges may be a continuous process. More than 600 judges sit on district courts and almost 200 on the courts of appeals, which makes it impossible for one President to have selected each and every judge currently sitting on any one bench.
Due to the vast number of vacancies that need to be filled at any one time, selecting impartial judges to replace outgoing judges may not always be effective with the President doing the choosing all alone. Therefore, the Department of Justice, members of Congress, the American Bar Association, and already-sitting Judges and Justices make recommendations to the President. Sometimes, judicial-hopefuls would even nominate themselves. A great time of thinking should be put into this in order to have a truly impartial and effective judge or justice. Sometimes, Senators of any one state may make a recommendation to the President, and usually that President may have to accept the nomination under political pressure. Ignoring the nomination would cause great conflict within the Senate and may have vast consequences on future bills or other nominations.
Presidents consider many factors when deciding on nominating a recommended judge-hopeful. Experience is a great must, most nominees for the Supreme Court have had substantial judicial or governmental experience, and many have law degrees or some other form of higher education. Political ideology is taken into consideration also, as serving on the Supreme Court does require dealings with politics. Presidents usually appoint judges and justices with a similar political ideology as their own, which usually results in the President appointing judges who are in the same political party as they are. Judges serve for life, so Presidents want Judges that would support them through their terms now and in the future.
Race and ethnicity has probably been given the greatest discretion when appointing. Until recently, federal judges were usually only white males. This was a result of President’s full discretion when appointing. However, in this day and age, ethnicity and race are a big deal. President’s now instead choose members of minorities instead of the usual white male. Again, this is all a result of politics and re-election or support.
Not everyone agrees exactly on how much power the federal court should have. Congress can always get around a Supreme Court ruling by merely passing a law around one that was previously declared unconstitutional. Courts have very limited power to implement decisions that they make. If the President or Congress chooses to ignore the...