Law and Order Supreme Court justice could be called the most prestigious law job in America. Justices make some of the most important decisions for the United States, and once appointed they serve for life, or until they step down. Unfortunately, there is no definite time when a justice’s “life term” will come to an end, and Justice Antonin Scalia’s suddenly ended earlier this year. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia died suddenly this year during a hunting trip in Texas at age 79. Scalia was an influential conservative justice in the Supreme Court, and his death leaves the court with a 4-4 split of democratic to republican justices. This is one of the reasons there is disagreement over when to appoint a new justice, before or after President
…show more content…
However, there is no real reason to wait until the next president takes office to appoint a new justice. Since 1900, six Supreme Court Justices have been appointed during a presidential election year, the most recent being Justice Kennedy, appointed in 1988 by President Reagan. (President Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination) This denounces conservative claims that a new justice should not be appointed in an election year, because it has successfully been done in the past. According to the White House, “the President of the United States has had the responsibility to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court every time- and any time- there is a vacancy on the bench.” (President Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination) There is no reason to wait for the people to elect a new president to appoint a new justice, as President Obama was elected by the people, and therefore is giving the people a say in who is appointed, regardless of if it is in an election …show more content…
If Obama does not appoint a new justice, the Supreme Court is in danger of having a 4-4 split of justices. According to CNN News, “If the court is equally divides in a case...it means the lower court opinion stands and there is no precedent set by the Supreme Court.” (de Vogue) Cases come to the Supreme Court when there are multiple rulings from different states or there is a reason to consider overturning a decision from a lower court. However, an equal split on the court would leave lower court rulings that had been brought to the Supreme Court to possibly overturn in place. (Bravin p.2) For this reason, it is necessary to have nine justices on the Supreme Court to make decisions, so that they are not in danger of being split equally on important matters, and therefore unable to set a precedent. President Obama should appoint a justice so that the court does not have eight justices and a risk of a 4-4 split for nearly a year before the next president is
However, there is no real reason to wait until the next president takes office to appoint a new justice. Since 1900, six Supreme Court Justices have been appointed during a presidential election year, the most recent being Justice Kennedy, appointed in 1988 by President Reagan. (President Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination) This denounces conservative claims that a new justice should not be appointed in an election year, because it has successfully been done in the past. According to the White House, “the President of the United States has had the responsibility to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court every time- and any time- there is a vacancy on the bench.” (President Obama’s Supreme Court Nomination) There is no reason to wait for the people to elect a new president to appoint a new justice, as President Obama was elected by the people, and therefore is giving the people a say in who is appointed, regardless of if it is in an election …show more content…
If Obama does not appoint a new justice, the Supreme Court is in danger of having a 4-4 split of justices. According to CNN News, “If the court is equally divides in a case...it means the lower court opinion stands and there is no precedent set by the Supreme Court.” (de Vogue) Cases come to the Supreme Court when there are multiple rulings from different states or there is a reason to consider overturning a decision from a lower court. However, an equal split on the court would leave lower court rulings that had been brought to the Supreme Court to possibly overturn in place. (Bravin p.2) For this reason, it is necessary to have nine justices on the Supreme Court to make decisions, so that they are not in danger of being split equally on important matters, and therefore unable to set a precedent. President Obama should appoint a justice so that the court does not have eight justices and a risk of a 4-4 split for nearly a year before the next president is