appointment process Flashcards
(11 cards)
describe the steps in the appointment process:
- a vacancy occurs through retirement, death or impeachment
- president instigates a search for possible nominees and interviews short-listed candidates
- president announces the nominee
- senate judiciary committee hold a confirmation hearing on a nominee and makes a recommendatory vote
- the nomination is debated and voted on in the full senate. a simple majority vote is required for confirmation
describe how a president selects a nominee:
-draw up a shortlist of potential candidates, taking into account suggestions from their political advisors, party and legal experts
-presidents aim to nominate a justice who will share their view of how the constitution should be interpreted e.g. Trump promised to accept nominees suggested by the Federalist Society (a conservative legal group)
-presidents must ensure that their nominee will attract necessary support from the senate
-candidates are background checked by the FBI
-most presidents interview the last few candidates before making their final choice and announcing the nominee, which results in media scrutiny
describe the senate confirmation of a nominee:
-the senate judicial committee first considers the nomination
-witnesses help the committee to assess the nominee’s suitability and the nominee is interviewed by the committee in a televised hearing
-the committee then votes on the candidate
-if the vote is successful the nominee is recommended to the senate for final approval by a simple majority vote e.g. ruth bader ginsburg was approved by the senate 96:3
-any senator can filibuster a nominee but a filibuster can be closed by a simple majority
what qualifications do people need before they can become a justice of the supreme court?
-there is actually no requirement for them to have any judicial experience e.g. Kagan had never served as a judge before she was appointed
-however most of them come from the federal courts of appeals - in 2021 8?9 justices were appointed from the courts of appeals
give an example of a nominee that was never approved:
Merrick Garland
-nominated by Obama in 2016
-at that time the republicans controlled the senate, and declared they wouldn’t consider him as there was an upcoming election in november
-democrats were furious and said this action was unprecedented, and that the senate should begin hearings as the president has a right to nominate whomever he chooses
give an example of a controversial nomination to the supreme court:
Brett Kavanaugh
-nominated by trump in 2018
-there was accusations of sexual misconduct against him although he denied it
-he was nominated to fill a seat left by someone who had been a swing vote, therefore he would have extra political significance
-there were demonstrations against his nomination
-he was confirmed by 50-48 votes which is the closest senate confirmation vote ever recorded
What are some criticisms of the selection and appointment process?
-presidents choose nominees who appear to support their political philosophy
-justices may be selected purely based on their voting record for certain issues e.g. abortion
-questioning by the committee may be focused on embarassing the nominee rather than analysing judicial expertise
-if the senate is held by the president’s party then it tends to carry out less effective scrutiny
-the senate’s refusal to hold a hearing for Garland in 2016 was a clear example of a political decision that violated the president’s right to appoint a justice to the court
-PGs have a lot of influence and can oppose/support a nominee - is this fair (PGs are unelected and unaccountable)
-media interest can be intrusive and personal
-lot of external influence e.g. federalist society very influential in supporting all three of trump’s nominations to the supreme court
what are the arguments that the selection and appointment process is fit for purpose?
-there’s detailed scrutiny of nominees e.g. Bork’s past decisions such as opposing expansions of civil rights and liberties stopped him from being selected
-senate judiciary committee members are experts
-senate confirmation is a check on presidential power
-the court has a broad range of conservative and liberal justices allowing a range of different legal approaches to be represented
-justices are independent and may follow a different approach to the president that nominated them e.g. David Souter (nom. by GW Bush)
-the involvement of the senate and the president gives the 2 elected branches of gov. oversight which is important for democracy, as the SC has so much power and is the guardian of the constitution
how has the nomination/selection process been politicised by the president?
-presidents usually nominate a candidate who shares their ideological and political leanings
-e.g. trump nominated Kavanaugh who shares his socially conservative view
how has the nomination/selection process been politicised by the senate?
-increased partisanship in senate confirmation, with there often being resistance to nominations
-senators from the opposition party look for opportunities to attack and embarass the nominee
-e.g. bork’s nomination was rejected because the democrats opposed him, and there was a democratic majority in the senate judiciary committee
how has the nomination/selection process been politicised by the media?
-often headlines/smear campaigns about possible candidate
-instead of the media performing a scrutiny role, they tend to hyper-fixate on details
-e.g. Kavanaugh was prominent in the media due to sexual assault allegations
