Following the death of Justice Antonin Scalia in February of this year, the US Supreme Court has still been operating with eight justices instead of appointing a ninth. The reason for this being a lack of response from the Senate to President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. This failure to acknowledge the President’s motion has sparked outrage across the country, bringing rise to the Constitutional provisions associated with the appointment of Supreme Court Justices. Several issues stemming from the Senate's’ lack of regard for the President's nomination, are those associated with the executive power of the President as well as the provisions of Supreme Judicial Power and the implications thereof. Understanding the obligations dictated
…show more content…
The Supreme Court is now operating under the superintendence of eight justices, leaving an empty seat yet to be filled. In an in-depth writing by the Constitutional Accountability Center, the importance of having a ninth justice on the board is clearly stated. “Former chief judges of the D.C. and Third Circuit Courts of Appeals and from 43 law school deans have explained that: The Supreme Court and our “system of law” are “materially hampered” by having only eight Justices on the Court” (“Material Harm to Our System of Justice”). They further explain “The absence of nine Justices prevents the Court from being the “final arbiter” of federal law, producing the possibility that the same law will have “different meanings in different parts of the country” (Material Harm to Our System of Justice). Having only eight justices presiding over the court presents the overwhelming possibility of a dead-lock 4-4 split, and thus no closure, on issues of high importance. The ramifications of the Supreme Court reaching dead-lock causes the issues they are intending to resolve, to remain at the discretion of the lower
The Supreme Court is now operating under the superintendence of eight justices, leaving an empty seat yet to be filled. In an in-depth writing by the Constitutional Accountability Center, the importance of having a ninth justice on the board is clearly stated. “Former chief judges of the D.C. and Third Circuit Courts of Appeals and from 43 law school deans have explained that: The Supreme Court and our “system of law” are “materially hampered” by having only eight Justices on the Court” (“Material Harm to Our System of Justice”). They further explain “The absence of nine Justices prevents the Court from being the “final arbiter” of federal law, producing the possibility that the same law will have “different meanings in different parts of the country” (Material Harm to Our System of Justice). Having only eight justices presiding over the court presents the overwhelming possibility of a dead-lock 4-4 split, and thus no closure, on issues of high importance. The ramifications of the Supreme Court reaching dead-lock causes the issues they are intending to resolve, to remain at the discretion of the lower