Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
I believe that the political predispositions of justices should not affect their legal opinions. This should be considered a fundamental truth for the reason that the Supreme Court is a legislative body rather than a political organization (Choper, 2013). Moreover, anyone who gets to the US Supreme Court counts on a fair decision that is based on facts and not predispositions. Still, the legal opinions of the majority of the US Supreme Court seem to be explicitly biased. To my mind, inattention to the rights and freedoms of any given individual in any given court (including the US Supreme Court) must be regarded as a kind of crime against the country itself (Owens & Wedeking, 2011). Even though it might seem like an exaggeration, the current situation proves that political predispositions of justices majorly impact their legal opinions.
Today, the majority of the Supreme Court is represented by conservative political judges. There are several vivid examples of these predispositions. For instance, the Court reached a verdict on the issue of abortion, stating that a private corporation could choose not to cover abortion care due to the religious beliefs of that certain worker (Choper, 2013). Even though it is evident that any person can have any political or religious beliefs, the issue is rather complicated and ambiguous. Currently, there is a possibility for any judge on the Supreme Court to operate his or her own religious belief with the intention of either permitting or refusing any person or business to make use of their right to medical care on the basis of their faith (Owens & Wedeking, 2011). It turned out that the conservative majority, consisting of five justices, voted that they could.
It would be rather reasonable to assume that personal or political viewpoints of the US Supreme Court justices affect their legal opinions on cases before the court. Nonetheless, it would not be true either if we supposed that Supreme Court justices only try to imply their own legal predilections like most of the politicians do (Casillas, Enns, & Wohlfarth, 2010). There are several aspects that subsidize to the complexity of this issue. First, it is almost impossible to separate a judge’s political partialities from his or her legal viewpoint. Some judges have faith in the fact that the Constitution should be interpreted conferring to what it initially meant (Bailey & Maltzman, 2011). Others think that the Constitution’s connotation can gradually transform or that any available evidence regarding the enactment of a decree might be utilized.
A judge who is hesitant to bring down laws and interprets the Constitution according to its initial philosophy will probably be quite insensitive to statements that several decrees intrude upon people’s constitutional rights. Moreover, if that judge is politically conservative, we might falsely assume that his or her decision is affected by political aspects rather than a legal viewpoint (Casillas et al., 2010). A judge’s personal experience is one of the most influential factors, but it is not always evident what kind of influence this factor would display. A judge might feel compassion for the poor if he or she grew up poor or may, on the contrary, believe that his or her own capability to fight the adversities of poverty proves that the poor should be in charge of their own state (Bailey & Maltzman, 2011). A judge who had experience with the military or administrational bodies may have a broader understanding of both their upsides and downsides.
References
Bailey, M. A., & Maltzman, F. (2011). The constrained court: Law, politics, and the decisions justices make. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Casillas, C. J., Enns, P. K., & Wohlfarth, P. C. (2010). How public opinion constrains the U.S. Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 74-88. Web.
Choper, J. H. (2013). Judicial review and the national political process: A functional reconsideration of the role of the Supreme Court. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Owens, R. J., & Wedeking, J. P. (2011). Justices and legal clarity: Analyzing the complexity of U.S. Supreme Court opinions. Law & Society Review, 45(4), 1027-1061. Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.