How Are Federal Judges Appointed? How Are They Approved ✓ Solved

How are Federal Judges appointed? How are they approved?

1. How are Federal Judges appointed? How are they approved?

2. What is the Judiciary?

3. Where are the duties for the Supreme Court found? How many members on the Supreme Court? Name three minority members?

4. Who is the Chief Justice?

5. What is the Tenure of federal Judges? How are they removed?

6. What influences Supreme Court decisions?

7. Define the following: a. Judicial Review b. Amicus Curiae c. Writ of Certiorari d. Stare Decisis e. Brown v. Board of Education f. Plaintiff g. Defendant h. Solicitor General i. Political ideology j. Judicial activism k. Marbury v. Madison l. Plea bargaining m. Precedents n. Criminal Law

Paper For Above Instructions

The appointment and approval of federal judges is a pivotal aspect of the American legal system, directly influencing the application of law and the administration of justice. Federal judges, including the Justices of the Supreme Court, are appointed by the President and must be confirmed by the Senate. This dual process ensures that both the executive and legislative branches of government have a role in the selection of judges, aiming to create a system of checks and balances.

First, the President selects a candidate, often based on recommendations from various sources including Senatorial input, interest groups, and legal precedents regarding qualifications. Once a nominee is identified, the President formally submits the nomination to the Senate. The Senate then conducts hearings during which the nominee is questioned about their judicial philosophy, past rulings, and understanding of legal principles. After these hearings, the Senate votes on whether to confirm the nominee. A simple majority is required for confirmation (U.S. Courts, n.d.).

The judiciary is defined as the judicial authorities of a country; it is the system of courts that interprets and applies the law in the name of the state. The judiciary's overarching aim is to uphold justice and ensure laws are applied fairly (Harlow, 2017). In the United States, the judicial branch is established by the Constitution and comprises the Supreme Court, appellate courts, and district courts, all of which function under the framework laid out by federal law.

The duties of the Supreme Court are primarily outlined in Article III of the U.S. Constitution. This Article gives the Supreme Court the authority to interpret the law, including its ability to rule on cases that pertain to the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties. The Supreme Court consists of nine Justices, including one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices, a structure which has been in place since the Judiciary Act of 1869 (U.S. Courts, n.d.). Among the current members, three minority Justices include Sonia Sotomayor, Clarence Thomas, and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

The Chief Justice of the United States is currently John Roberts, having taken office in September 2005. The Chief Justice's responsibilities include presiding over court sessions, leading discussions among the Justices, and often playing a significant role in the Supreme Court’s judicial agenda and case management (Ginsburg, 2020). The tenure of federal judges, including Supreme Court Justices, is for life, a feature designed to insulate them from political pressure and external influence. Judges can be removed only through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate, a process that underscores the importance of judicial independence (U.S. Courts, n.d.).

Supreme Court decisions can be influenced by various factors including public opinion, legal precedents, the individual philosophies of Justices, and the political climate at the time of the decision. Judicial activism and restraint are two opposing philosophies that further shape decision-making; activism advocates for an active role in creating policy through interpretation of the Constitution, while restraint emphasizes a limited role, advocating for deference to legislation (Epps, 2013).

Next, it is essential to define several key legal terms. Judicial review is the power of courts to assess whether a law is in compliance with the Constitution. This power was firmly established in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison (1803), which set the precedent for judicial interpretation (Barnett, 2013). An Amicus Curiae, or "friend of the court," refers to a person or group who is not a party to a case but offers information or expertise relevant to the case's arguments.

A writ of certiorari is an order by a higher court, especially the Supreme Court, to review the decisions of lower courts. Stare decisis is the legal principle that dictates that courts should follow precedents set by previous cases when making decisions. Similarly, precedents are prior rulings that are referenced in subsequent cases with similar circumstances (Posner, 2009). Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was pivotal in holding that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, thus overturning the precedent set by Plessy v. Ferguson (1896).

The terms plaintiff and defendant are fundamental in legal proceedings; the plaintiff is the party who brings a case against another in a court of law, while the defendant is the individual being accused or sued. The role of the Solicitor General is critical, as this individual represents the United States before the Supreme Court and often shapes the nation's legal stance in high-profile cases.

Lastly, the influence of political ideology on judicial decision-making cannot be understated, as Justices’ beliefs can impact their interpretations of law. Judicial activism typically correlates with liberal ideologies that favor robust judicial intervention, while conservatism often aligns with judicial restraint, advocating for limited judicial influence over legislative processes (Tushnet, 2019). In the realm of criminal law, which involves crimes and their prosecution, principles and decisions also derive from precedents set in prior cases, guiding judicial approaches to similar instances.

References

• Barnett, R. A. (2013). Our Republican Constitution: Securing the Liberty and Sovereignty of We the People. Encounter Books.
• Epps, G. (2013). To An Unknown God: A Memoir. New York: Simon & Schuster.
• Ginsburg, R. B. (2020). My Own Words. Simon & Schuster.
• Harlow, C. (2017). The Judiciary: An Introduction to the Courts. Routledge.
• Posner, R. A. (2009). How Judges Think. Harvard University Press.
• Tushnet, M. (2019). The New Constitutional Order. Princeton University Press.
• U.S. Courts. (n.d.). About Federal Courts.
• U.S. Supreme Court. (n.d.). About the Supreme Court.
• Cornell Law School. (n.d.). The Judiciary.
• National Constitution Center. (n.d.). What Is Judicial Review?.