In announcing his choice to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, President Obama set forth the following three principles on the role of the Supreme Court:
First, a justice should possess an independent mind, unimpeachable credentials, and an unquestionable mastery of law. There is no doubt this person will face complex legal questions, so it is imperative that he or she possess a rigorous intellect that will help provide clear answers.
Second, a Justice should recognize the limits of the judiciary’s role. With a commitment to impartial justice rather than any particular ideology, the next Supreme Court justice will understand that the job is to interpret the law, not make law. However, I know there will be cases before the Supreme Court in which the law is not clear. In those cases, a justice’s analysis will necessarily be shaped by his or her own perspective, ethics, and judgment.
Therefore, the third quality I looked for in a judge is a keen understanding that justice is not about abstract legal theory, nor some footnote in a dusty casebook. It’s the kind of life experience earned outside the classroom and the courtroom; experience that suggests he or she views the law not only as an intellectual exercise, but also grasps the way it affects the daily reality of people’s lives in a big, complicated democracy, and in rapidly-changing times. In my view, that’s an essential element for arriving at just decisions and fair outcomes.
The third principle is the o9ne that concerns me. It allows a liberal justice like Sonia Sotomayor to arrive at a decision based on her life experiences and political orientation rather than on the intent of the Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment