Comparing Two Supreme Court Views

Both Supreme Court justice argue in valid points. The world is changing and so does technology and the views of citizens. While making decision justice(s) must think about when was constitution written and how the world have change since then, if not it would be like watching black and white television today. So I support the Justice Breyer approach and court must be guided by the views of the citizens. Just a caution note I’m not trying to say we must ignore the constitution and do what we like but we must adopt with the changes as necessary.

I think it’s appropriate for Supreme Court to derive new fundamental right. Bill of rights doesn’t guarantee most of the right we have today. Think about 50 years ago someone saying I’m gay- he has no place to live in this society but today it is not a big deal, so does same sex marriage. Obviously, views of the people are changing and they are adopting with the changes. Just for example- who would ever thought to …show more content…
In other words typically president appoint the qualified candidate whose views are aligned with president. Are they too powerful-it depend on individual views? Our political system have division of power between legislative, executive, and judiciary so they are not too powerful. In contrast, Supreme Court can overturn the law that is supported by legislative (congress) and executive (president) branch – in this sense they are too powerful. This power is necessary so states and congress follow the law and avoid them from being too powerful.

As noted earlier typically president appoint the qualified candidate for Supreme Court justice whose views are aligned with president. Supreme Court justice have lifetime term limit. Let’s assume that Hillary Clinton win this election and elect the liberal justice and majority of the justice as same views as justice Breyer. This makes court to be too powerful and may overturn the more conservative