The NYT has a sad article posted that describes the waning influence of the U.S. Supreme Court on jurisprudence elsewhere in the world. Can't imagine why, can you?
At the risk of belaboring the obvious, the article causes us to reflect on the sort of appointments that John McCain would make, were he elected. It's not just threats to Roe v. Wade that loom, as important a consideration as that is. We also have to remember what judges in the Scalia mold think of executive privilege, human rights, and respect for international norms.
Thank goodness we're booming in other exports, though, right?
By the way, if you'd like to participate in a caption contest for the above picture, head on over to World O' Crap.
2 comments:
It's not just the Supreme Court. The VAST majority of federal cases never get that far, but all of the judges on the district and circuit levels are appointed by the president and may serve for life.
Deference to executive power is the broad area that concerns me most. And there are a lot of district and circuit judges like Alito who are VERY deferential to the executive on issues like detainee treatment. The only thing worse than a president with very bad ideas is one with the backing of a supine federal judiciary.
Say what you will about Scalia, but at least when he defers to another branch, it's the legislative (and at least he has the courtesy to write really entertaining opinions while doing so). Alito? He's more of a "president's lackey" type.
Agree to all that, JJ. Well said. I just wanted to keep the points in the post simple. I'm in full campaign mode. Nuance returns after we win.
(Plus, I had just seen that picture of Scalia on WOC.)
Post a Comment