CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
Youth Summit 2005
Lesson 3
A Look at the Current Court
Objectives: Students will consider important characteristics of Supreme Court justices
including judicial temperament.
Handouts: (1) Bios of the Current Court; (2) Judicial Temperament article by Hon. James
Duffy, Jr.; (3) ABA - Gavel Guidelines.
Extensions: Lessons from Street Law: The Challenge of Selecting an Ideal Supreme Court
Nominee by Cathy Ruffing, teacher, and Nominating Federal Judges by Rebecca Small,
teacher.
A. Daily Warm-Up and Current Events Alert!
Check National Constitution Center's website for relevant and timely current event
news alerts. www.constitutioncenter.org.
B. Who Are the Current Justices?
Distribute Handout 1, Biographies of the Current Court, to nine small groups. Each
small group focuses on one justice. The group reports to the class about "their justice."
For more detail, see CSpan's main resource directory of judiciary resources. It will link
the researcher to profiles for each justice: www.c-span.org/resources/judiciary.asp.
C. Questions to Think About
Balancing the Court
Some urge that the court should be balanced in terms of ethnicity, gender. age,
experiences, philosophies (for more on judicial philosophy, see Lesson 4). Do you agree
or disagree with a balancing test? Why or why not?
Judicial Temperament
What about "judicial temperament?" What do you think it is? Where does it fit in the
chart? How important is it when selecting a justice? How can it be measured? (This
consideration urged by Susan Leeson, Oregon Supreme Court, Retired.) See Handouts
2 and 3 for the comments by a State Supreme Court judge (concise, readable article on
meaning of judicial temperament) and the ABA (interesting, detailed list), respectively.
Ranking
Teachers: after discussion of the concepts, consider making this a ranking exercise individually, small groups, or as a class.
D. Vocabulary
Add to the list: judicial temperament.
1
E.
Extended Activities, Homework, Journal Entry
Extensions
1. Write a help wanted advertisement for the position of Supreme Court justice.
2. Label a body. This is from Melanie Morris, West Sylvan Middle School teacher,
divide into groups with about four students in each. On large butcher paper, one
student gets his or her body traced on the paper. Then label the parts need to be a
good justice. Example: brain for wisdom and knowledge, backbone for standing up
for what's right, etc.
3. Street Law lessons: The Challenge of Selecting an Ideal Supreme Court Nominee and
Nominating Federal Judges.
Homework/Journal
1. Write about the justice you learned about. What impressed you most and why?
2. Discuss what experience, skills, or characteristics are most important for a justice, or
the next justice. (Is there a difference? Why or why not?)
3. Describe judicial temperament.
2
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
LESSON 3 - Handout 1
Youth Summit 2005
Biographies of the Justices of the Supreme Court
Source: booklet prepared by the Supreme Court of the United States, and
published with funding from the Supreme Court Historical Society
William H. Rehnquist, Chief Justice of the United States, was born in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin, October 1, 1924. He married Natalie Cornell, now deceased, and has three
children—James, Janet, and Nancy. From 1943–1946 he served in the U.S. Army Air
Forces. He received a B.A., M.A., and LL.B. from Stanford University and an M.A. from
Harvard University. He served as a law clerk for Justice Robert H. Jackson of the
Supreme Court of the United States during the 1951 and 1952 Terms, and practiced law
in Phoenix, Arizona from 1953–1969. He served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of
Legal Counsel from 1969–1971. President Nixon nominated him to the Supreme Court,
and he took his seat as an Associate Justice on January 7, 1972. Nominated as Chief
Justice by President Reagan, he assumed that office on September 26, 1986. ~~ Chief
Justice Rehnquist died of thyroid cancer September 3, 2005.
John Paul Stevens, Associate Justice, was born in Chicago, Illinois, April 20, 1920. He
married Maryan Mulholland, and has four children—John Joseph (deceased), Kathryn,
Elizabeth Jane, and Susan Roberta. He received an A.B. from the University of Chicago,
and a J.D. from Northwestern University School of Law. He served in the United States
Navy from 1942–1945, and was a law clerk to Justice Wiley Rutledge of the Supreme
Court of the United States during the 1947 Term. He was admitted to law practice in
Illinois in 1949. He was Associate Counsel to the Subcommittee on the Study of
Monopoly Power of the Judiciary Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives,
1951–1952, and a member of the Attorney General’ s National Committee to Study
Antitrust Law, 1953–1955. He was Second Vice President of the Chicago Bar Association
in 1970. From 1970–1975, he served as a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for
the Seventh Circuit. President Ford nominated him as an Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court, and he took his seat December 19, 1975.
Sandra Day O’ Connor, Associate Justice, was born in El Paso, Texas, March 26, 1930.
She married John Jay O’ Connor III in 1952 and has three sons—Scott, Brian, and Jay.
She received her B.A. and LL.B. from Stanford University. She served as Deputy
County Attorney of San Mateo County, California from 1952–1953 and as a civilian
attorney for Quartermaster Market Center, Frankfurt, Germany from 1954–1957. From
1958– 1960, she practiced law in Maryvale, Arizona, and served as Assistant Attorney
General of Arizona from 1965–1969. She was appointed to the Arizona State Senate in
1969 and was subsequently reelected to two two-year terms. In 1975 she was elected
Judge of the Maricopa County Superior Court and served until 1979, when she was
appointed to the Arizona Court of Appeals. President Reagan nominated her as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and she took her seat September 25, 1981.
~~ Assoc. Justice O'Connor announced her resignation from the Court on July 1, 2005.
3
Antonin Scalia, Associate Justice, was born in Trenton, New Jersey, March 11, 1936. He
married Maureen McCarthy and has nine children—Ann Forrest, Eugene, John Francis,
Catherine Elisabeth, Mary Clare, Paul David, Matthew, Christopher James, and
Margaret Jane. He received his A.B. from Georgetown University and the University of
Fribourg, Switzerland, and his LL.B. from Harvard Law School, and was a Sheldon
Fellow of Harvard University from 1960–1961. He was in private practice in Cleveland,
Ohio from 1961–1967, a Professor of Law at the University of Virginia from 1967–1971,
and a Professor of Law at the University of Chicago from 1977–1982, and a Visiting
Professor of Law at Georgetown University and Stanford University. He was chairman
of the American Bar Association’ s Section of Administrative Law, 1981–1982, and its
Conference of Section Chairman, 1982–1983. He served the federal government as
General Counsel of the Office of Telecommunications Policy from 1971–1972, Chairman
of the Administrative Conference of the United States from 1972–1974, and Assistant
Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel from 1974–1977. He was appointed
Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1982.
President Reagan nominated him as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he
took his seat September 26, 1986.
Anthony M. Kennedy, Associate Justice, was born in Sacramento, California, July 23,
1936. He married Mary Davis and has three children. He received his B.A. from
Stanford University and the London School of Economics, and his LL.B. from Harvard
Law School. He was in private practice in San Francisco, California from 1961–1963, as
well as in Sacramento, California from 1963–1975. From 1965 to 1988, he was a
Professor of Constitutional Law at the McGeorge School of Law, University of the
Pacific. He has served in numerous positions during his career, including a member of
the California Army National Guard in 1961, the board of the Federal Judicial Center
from 1987–1988, and two committees of the Judicial Conference of the United States:
the Advisory Panel on Financial Disclosure Reports and Judicial Activities, subsequently
renamed the Advisory Committee on Codes of Conduct, from 1979–1987, and the
Committee on Pacific Territories from 1979–1990, which he chaired from 1982–1990. He
was appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in 1975.
President Reagan nominated him as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he
took his seat February 18, 1988.
David Hackett Souter, Associate Justice, was born in Melrose, Massachusetts,
September 17, 1939. He was graduated from Harvard College, from which he received
his A.B. After two years as a Rhodes Scholar at Magdalen College, Oxford, he received
an A.B. in Jurisprudence from Oxford University and an M.A. in 1989. After receiving an
LL.B. from Harvard Law School, he was an associate at Orr and Reno in Concord, New
Hampshire from 1966 to 1968, when he became an Assistant Attorney General of New
Hampshire. In 1971, he became Deputy Attorney General and in 1976, Attorney
General of New Hampshire. In 1978, he was named an Associate Justice of the Superior
Court of New Hampshire, and was appointed to the Supreme Court of New
Hampshire as an Associate Justice in 1983. He became a Judge of the United States
Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on May 25, 1990. President Bush nominated him
as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he took his seat October 9, 1990.
4
Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice, was born in the Pin Point community of Georgia
near Savannah June 23, 1948. He married Virginia Lamp in 1987 and has one child,
Jamal Adeen, by a previous marriage. He attended Conception Seminary and received
an A.B., cum laude, from Holy Cross College, and a J.D. from Yale Law School in 1974.
He was admitted to law practice in Missouri in 1974, and served as an Assistant
Attorney General of Missouri from 1974–1977, an attorney with the Monsanto
Company from 1977–1979, and Legislative Assistant to Senator John Danforth from
1979–1981. From 1981–1982, he served as Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, U.S.
Department of Education, and as Chairman of the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission from 1982–1990. He became a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1990. President Bush nominated him as an
Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he took his seat October 23, 1991.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Associate Justice, was born in Brooklyn, New York, March 15,
1933. She married Martin D. Ginsburg in 1954, and has a daughter, Jane, and a son,
James. She received her B.A. from Cornell University, attended Harvard Law School,
and received her LL.B. from Columbia Law School. She served as a law clerk to the
Honorable Edmund L. Palmieri, Judge of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, from 1959–1961. From 1961–1963, she was a research
associate and then associate director of the Columbia Law School Project on
International Procedure. She was a Professor of Law at Rutgers University School of
Law from 1963–1972, and Columbia Law School from 1972–1980, and a fellow at the
Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences in Stanford, California from
1977–1978. In 1971, she was instrumental in launching the Women’ s Rights Project of
the American Civil Liberties Union, and served as the ACLU’s General Counsel from
1973–1980, and on the National Board of Directors from 1974–1980. She was appointed
a Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in
1980. President Clinton nominated her as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court,
and she took her seat August 10, 1993.
Stephen G. Breyer, Associate Justice, was born in San Francisco, California, August 15,
1938. He married Joanna Hare in 1967, and has three children—Chloe, Nell, and
Michael. He received an A.B. from Stanford University, a B.A. from Magdalen College,
Oxford, and an LL.B. from Harvard Law School. He served as a law clerk to Justice
Arthur Goldberg of the Supreme Court of the United States during the 1964 Term, as a
Special Assistant to the Assistant U.S. Attorney General for Antitrust, 1965–1967, as an
Assistant Special Prosecutor of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force, 1973, as Special
Counsel of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, 1974–1975, and as Chief Counsel of the
committee, 1979–1980. He was an Assistant Professor, Professor of Law, and Lecturer at
Harvard Law School, 1967–1994, a Professor at the Harvard University Kennedy School
of Government, 1977–1980, and a Visiting Professor at the College of Law, Sydney,
Australia and at the University of Rome. From 1980–1990, he served as a Judge of the
United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, and as its Chief Judge, 1990–1994.
He also served as a member of the Judicial Conference of the United States, 1990–1994,
and of the United States Sentencing Commission, 1985–1989. President Clinton
nominated him as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and he took his seat
August 3, 1994.
5
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
Summit 2005
Youth
Biographies of the Court
Worksheet
Answer the following questions about your justice(s) …
Justice's name
Age
Family status
Academic background
Legal background
What else would you like to know about him or her?
6
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
LESSON 3 - Handout 2
Youth Summit 2005
'Judicial temperament' a matter of showing respect to all
by Hon. James E. Duffy Jr.
The rules of the Judicial Selection Commission provide that it may consider the "judicial
temperament" of a judicial applicant (or a petitioning judge seeking retention) together with
other qualities such as integrity and moral courage, legal ability and expertise, intelligence and
wisdom, compassion and fairness, and diligence and decisiveness.
What is "judicial temperament"? The American Bar Association defines it as having
"compassion, decisiveness, open-mindedness, sensitivity, courtesy, patience, freedom from
bias and commitment to equal justice. "While the association's definition is helpful in its
generic sense, it does not define for us what it means to have a "good" judicial temperament in
the real world of courtroom interaction with a judge. Recognizing that any evaluation of "good
judicial temperament" in general, or as applied to a specific individual, is subjective, I offer my
thoughts based upon 35 years in the practice of law and 10 months as a member of the
judiciary.
To begin, having a good judicial temperament does not mean that the judge must be "Mr./Ms.
Congeniality," with a sparkling personality and good sense of humor. While these attributes
may be helpful (particularly a good sense of humor), having a good judicial temperament is
something much deeper and fundamental to our system of justice.
Our system of justice depends on our citizen's faith and trust that judges will decide disputes
fairly and impartially, free from bias or prejudice. Out of respect for the system of justice and
the judge's position in this system, judges have traditionally been accorded respect by our
citizens. In return, judges must respect all those they interact with, including the parties to the
dispute, their attorneys, witnesses, jurors, court reporters, staff and members of the public.
How do judges show respect? In many ways, including the following: by treating everyone
with dignity, by being polite and courteous, by listening carefully to the testimony presented
and the arguments of counsel, by being patient (understanding that litigation involves human
emotions and that the courtroom is not a familiar or comfortable place for most people), and in
general by showing that the judge genuinely cares about the matter being presented,
understands that it is an important matter for those involved, and conveys the attitude that
he/she will do his/her best to decide the case fairly and objectively, based on the evidence
presented and applicable law.
In summary, the judge must strive to be the embodiment of justice. In my experience, if the
judge has done his/her job, the parties and counsel (who are well aware that there will be a
"winner" and "loser" in the litigation if it is pursued to a decision in court) will be satisfied that
they have had a fair hearing of the dispute, regardless of the judge's ultimate decision.
To me, having a "good judicial temperament" is thus not a matter of personality but a matter of
commitment to be the embodiment of justice by showing respect to all one interacts with. If
shown genuine respect by our judges, our citizens will continue to place their faith and trust in
our judicial system, which is a cornerstone of our democratic form of government.
James E. Duffy Jr. is an associate justice of the Hawai'i Supreme Court.
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/May/02/op/op11a.html/?print=on
7
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
LESSON 3 - Handout 3
Youth Summit 2005
American Bar Association
Gavel Guidelines for Judicial Selection
INDEX
1. Introduction
2. Integrity
3. Legal Knowledge and Ability
4. Judicial Temperament
5. Diligence
6. Punctuality
7. Current Physical and Mental
Ability
8. Professional Experience
9. Litigation Experience
10. Past Professional Conduct
11. Financial Responsibility
12. Political Activity
13. Character
14. Patience
15. Common Sense
16. Tact
17. Social Consciousness
18. Association and Public Service
19. The Judicial System
1. Introduction
The Judicial Evaluation Committee should consider the following Guidelines for the
evaluation of candidates for judicial positions and sitting judges seeking retention. These
Guidelines are based on criteria set forth in Section 15 of the Resolution of the Board of
Managers creating this Committee on the new procedure for judicial selection. Section 15
specifies the criteria to be: integrity, legal knowledge, legal ability, judicial temperament,
diligence, punctuality, health, age, professional experience, and such other elements of
character and ability which the Committee shall define, subject to approval of the Board. . . .
The Guidelines for candidates should embrace (1) personal characteristics or attributes; (2)
professional preparation for judicial position; and (3) judicial performance in cases of sitting
judges. The judicial responsibilities involved in each court should be considered fully to
provide a framework against which to measure the applicant's performance or prospective
performance.
Eminent scholars of judicial selection have stated that there have not been developed reliable
objective yardsticks for the measurement of desirable judicial attributes are personal,
subjective and human.
2. Integrity
Webster defines integrity as a "rigid adherence to a code of behavior and equates it with
honesty." Obviously, this bare definition will not suffice for our purposes without supplying
the "code of behavior" referred to in the definition. A definition sometimes referred to is
"Integrity is a rigid adherence to the facts and the law." Expanding on the definition referred to
would require that the candidate have the capacity to be "fair" and unbiased. Moreover,
instinct toward self-preservation, self-aggrandizement, prejudice, bias and selfishness should
be completely eliminated or suppressed as far as is humanly possible in decisions to be made
by a judge.
Analysis of the deportment, rulings, decisions and attitude of a sitting judge should bring to
light the answers to these questions:
(1) Does this judge allow bias or prejudice to dictate decision?
8
(2) Is the judge honest in his formulation of the decision?
(3) Does the judge base the decision on the evidence of the facts and the law without
regard to who the parties or the lawyers are that are involved?
(4) Is the judge able to disregard partisan political interests and other forms of influence
and act independently?
Generally, when evaluating a lawyer with no previous history as a judge, the reputation of the
individual in the legal community and in activities not related to the practice of law have to be
analyzed. Taking into consideration the traditional role of a lawyer as an advocate presenting
his or her client's view in the best possible light, certain questions can be asked:
(1) Does he manipulate facts or evidence?
(2) Does he deliberately misapply or misquote the law?
(3) Can the representations made by counsel to other members of the bar be relied
upon?
(4) Is his emotion controlled, so that reason prevails?
(5) Is justice the main objective?
An individual with the "integrity" necessary to qualify must be one who is most able to put
aside self-aggrandizement, prejudice and bias; who can ignore personalities and parties to the
greatest degree; who can base the decision on the facts and the law applicable to the facts.
3. Legal Knowledge and Ability
It is difficult to separate the concepts of legal knowledge and legal ability. Legal knowledge, in
its simplest form, may be defined as familiarity with established legal concepts and procedural
rules. Legal ability may similarity be defined as the intellectual capacity to interpret and apply
established legal concepts to the facts and circumstances presented. Legal ability would also
seem to involve skill in communicating, orally and in writing, the thought processes leading to
a legal conclusion.
Legal knowledge and ability is not a static quality, but is acquired by the experience of a
person and by the continual learning process involved in keeping abreast of changing concepts
through education and study. Commentators in their discussions of criteria for the selection of
judges note that "knowledge of legal procedure, keeping abreast of legal developments, level
of skill in communication; level of skill in written communication" are important elements of a
judge's qualifications. (American Judicature Society 64, August 1974). There is no doubt that
what they are referring to, generally, is called legal ability.
A candidate for judicial office should ordinarily possess a higher level of legal knowledge and
ability than the average lawyer practicing in the community. Aside from the foregoing
qualifications, there are other elements which enhance legal ability. These are human qualities
such as moral courage, consideration of others, courtesy, patience and a reputation for
fairness. Although not technically legal, they are certainly important criteria in determining
the "ability" of a judge to develop and administer the law.
4. Judicial Temperament
"Judicial temperament" appears to be universally regarded as a valid and important criterion
in evaluating prospective and sitting judges. However, this quality is perhaps more easily
recognized than defined. Nevertheless, there are several indicia of "judicial temperament"
which, while ultimately premised upon subjective judgment, are sufficiently understood by
practitioners and laymen alike as to afford workable guidelines which can be applied by
impartial evaluators seeking to measure the "temperament" of a judicial candidate.
9
Among the qualities which judicial temperament comprises are patience, open-mindedness,
courtesy, tact, firmness, understanding, compassion and humility. Because the judicial
function is essentially one of facilitating conflict resolution among competing interests, judicial
temperament implies the ability to deal with counsel, jurors, witnesses and parties calmly and
courteously, and the willingness to hear and consider what is said on all sides of a debatable
proposition. It requires the ability to be even-tempered, yet firm; open-minded, yet willing and
able to reach decisions; confident, yet not egocentric.
Because of the range of topics and issues with which a judge may be required to deal, judicial
temperament presumes the willingness and ability to assimilate data outside the judge's own
experience, without bias. It presumes, moreover, an even disposition, buttressed by a keen
sense of justice, which enables an intellectual serenity in the approach to complex decisions,
and forbearance under provocation. Judicial temperament also implies a mature sense of
proportion: reverence for the law, but appreciation that the rule of law is not static and
unchanging; understanding of the judge's important role in the judicial process, yet
recognition that the administration of justice and the rights of the parties transcend the judge's
self-importance. Judicial temperament is typified by recognition that "there but for the grace of
God go I," as the judge deals with the matters spread before him. It requires "an uncommon
touch, commonly applied"
It is perhaps wise to note that in contrast to these elements of judicial temperament, the factors
which indicate a lack of such temperament are also identifiable and understandable. Judicial
temperament thus implies an absence of arrogance, impatience, pomposity, loquacity,
irascibility, arbitrariness or tyranny.
Judicial temperament is a quality which is not easily quantifiable but does not wholly evade
discovery; its absence can probably be fairly ascertained. Wide-ranging interviews which
touch upon not only the law, but also upon social, moral, ethical and other concerns, should
provide insight into the temperament of judicial candidates. Evaluation of a sitting judge, of
course, is facilitated by the fact that his bearing, demeanor and temperament are visible to
casual observers and the practitioner who appear before him.
Notwithstanding the inherently subjective elements of any estimate of "judicial temperament",
such as inquiry, is an extremely important criterion of judicial fitness.
5. Diligence
"Diligence" is a relative term incapable of an exact definition. For example, diligence, in its
ordinary sense, may be said to be that displayed in the management of one's own affairs by the
average business or professional persons met with in daily life--persons who have the usual
amount of practical common sense and who are endowed with ordinary prudence and
foresight. However, it is a relative term, and its meaning depends on its use in varying
circumstances. As applied to a judge, "diligence" may be defined as a steady application to the
judicial business at hand; a constant effort to accomplish the undertaking. While not
necessarily the same as "industriousness," it does imply the elements of constancy,
attentiveness, persistence, perseverance, painstakingness, assiduousness and untiring effort.
Under Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct, a judge should perform the duties of his office
impartially and "diligently." The proscription for such canons involves "diligence" in a wide
spectrum. It entails adjudicative responsibilities, order and decorum in proceedings, patience
and courtesy to the persons with whom the judge deals, an efficient and business like attitude
10
while being patient and deliberate, the prompt dispatch of business, the devotion of adequate
time to duties, punctuality in attendance and expeditiousness in determinations. Necessarily, it
also involves alertness to the character and fitness of persons and their conduct within the
community of lawyers and judges, the fulfillment of all administrative responsibilities with
dispatch, appointments based on need, attention to the rules of disqualification, and particular
attentiveness to avoiding of appearances of improper conduct.
6. Punctuality
Webster's Dictionary describes a punctual person as one who acts or habitually acts at an
appointed time or at a regularly scheduled time. "Punctuality" is also considered to mean
being prompt.
The Illinois Supreme Court Rules governing Standards of Judicial Conduct establishes a
standard of "Promptness":
A judge should be prompt in the performance of his judicial duties. He should
recognize that the time of litigants, jurors and attorneys is of value and that habitual
lack of punctuality or diligence creates dissatisfaction with the administration of the
Court.
The American Bar Association Code of Judicial Conduct, states that a judge should dispose
promptly of the business of the court. This has been referred also as an element to be
considered in the criteria for diligence. …
Measuring the punctuality of a sitting judge is much easier than applying it to the lawyer who
seeks a judicial position. The criterion of punctuality applies with equal force to the lawyer
and to the judge. The lawyer should have a reputation which indicates that he does not
procrastinate in his law practice; that he meets procedural deadlines in his trial work; that he
keeps his commitments; and that he respects the time of the other lawyer and his client as well
as of the court.
7. Current Physical and Mental Ability
The Committee shall determine, based on written response from the candidate's primary
physician or other health care provider, whether the candidate currently possesses the
physical and mental ability to perform the essential functions of a judge with or without
reasonable accommodation.
The Committee shall refrain from any additional inquiry into the candidate's health, including
any inquiry regarding the basis of the response from the physician or health care provider. By
limiting its consideration to the candidate's current physical and mental ability, the Committee
shall refrain from engaging in any inquiry regarding the candidate's previous or future health.
The Committee shall likewise refrain from any speculation regarding whether the age of any
candidate may result in an inability to perform as a judge in the future. However, the
Committee may consider the length of time that all candidates intent to serve, including
whether candidates intend to serve out the entire term of the office sought.
8. Professional Experience
"No person shall be eligible to be a Judge or Associate Judge unless he is a United States
citizen, a licensed attorney-at-law of this State, and a resident of the unit which selects him. No
change in the boundaries of unit shall affect the tenure in office of a Judge or Associate Judge
incumbent at the time of such change." (Ill. Const., Art. VI, Sec. II; 1970).
11
While exceptions may from time to time be recognized, a significant degree of experience as a
lawyer active in courtroom practice or the equivalent should usually be required when
recommending a person for the trial bench. The extent of such experience will of necessity be
related to the total experience of the individual at the time the lawyer is under consideration
for a judicial position. An element of this experience is demonstrated administrative ability.
The number of years that a lawyer has practiced is a valid criterion for screening applicants for
judge. Anyone under consideration for a position on the Supreme Court, Appellate Court, or
Circuit Court (whether as a Circuit or Associate Judge) ordinarily should have at least twelve
years experience as a practicing lawyer or judge. Unless such a candidate exhibits unusual
qualifications and maturity, it should be an exception to recommended anyone with less that
twelve years of such experience.
Candidate for the Supreme Court and the Appellate Court should be required to have engaged
in some form of practice, or to have had trial bench experience, which produced some
measurable accomplishments demonstrating their ability to reason thoroughly and
communicate with clarity in writing, as well as the courage to make decisions.
The foregoing is not intended to eliminate from consideration outstanding persons who have
demonstrated ability in teaching and who have contributed to the literature of the profession,
or who have significant legal experience in government or private agencies.
9. Litigation Experience
Except where unusual competence and experience are demonstrated, a candidate should have
some litigation experience before being selected for the trial bench. At the same time, it is
recognized that extensive litigation experience may not be as essential to a trial judge as broad
experience with people. This includes the capacity to understand people coming from many
different environments.
In addition to the traditional concept of service as counsel for a party in civil or criminal
litigation, litigation experience may be credited for representation of parties in adversary
proceedings before administrative tribunals as well as service as an associate judge.
The academician and government or corporate attorney should not be held unqualified on this
ground alone. To require that all or substantially all of those years be spent in litigation would
disqualify some otherwise outstanding candidates, but the extent and complexity of the
experience as a litigator should be given weight when awarding ratings to the prospective
candidates. There may be many other attributes and characteristics which will provide a
sound foundation for selection for a judicial position.
By the same token, a trial lawyer should not be accepted as a candidate without looking for
some other characteristics which may be detrimental to his "on the job" training as an judge.
Such traits as arbitrariness may be evident in his relationship with other lawyers, employees
and others with whom he has any contact. A person's reputation may also disclose a bias
which may disqualify him. There should be available unbiased sources of information to avoid
acceptance of unfounded rumors.
10. Past Professional Conduct
Past professional conduct of an applicant is a valid subject of inquiry to determine the present
qualifications of a candidate who is screened for the first time, or of a judge seeking retention.
12
Proceedings before (discipline or inquiry boards) may be a valid consideration in evaluating a
candidate. In the case of a candidate who has been disciplined, the degree of rehabilitation and
reputation of the individual should be reviewed in applying this guideline.
11. Financial Responsibility
The financial responsibility of a candidate is one of the factors to be considered in determining
ability to properly serve. All candidates, including sitting judges, should be financially
responsible.
12. Political Activity
Illinois Supreme Court rule on the subject of partisan politics reads as follows:
A judge shall not (a) hold any official or office in a political party, shall not serve on any
party committee or act as a party leader, and shall not take a part in political campaigns
except when he is a candidate for a federal, state or local non-judicial elective office
without first resigning his judgeship. A candidate for a judgeship shall not personally
solicit campaign contributions, but should establish some method which will not
involve him in the direct solicitation of funds.
The nature and quality of political service by a candidate may be a valid consideration.
Political service may add a desirable dimension to a candidate's qualifications. On the other
hand, a candidate's political career may be such as to demonstrate a likelihood that he will not
act independently on the bench.
There is no objection to a candidate for judicial office being active politically, but there is
everything wrong with his continuation as a participant in partisan politics after receiving a
judicial election or appointment.
Any person after being elected or appointed to a judicial position, and while holding a judicial
position, shall observe the above rule. It is proper for the Committee to ascertain such
observance.
13. Character
Good moral character is something that must be determined from the entire personal
background of the candidate.
14. Patience
Humility, tolerance and the ability to exercise forbearance under provocation are traits which
must be found in the candidate. These are usually considered essential elements in
ascertaining judicial temperament.
15. Common Sense
This is the ability to make practical and reasonable judgments. It includes using a sense of
proportion as to each problem and finding an appropriate solution within applicable law.
16. Tact
This involves a sensitivity to the feelings of others. It means a capacity to deal with others
without giving offense, an ability to create reciprocal good feelings.
17. Social Consciousness
Some effort should be made to ascertain if the candidate is sensitive to human rights and
needs. Many social problems receive the attention of judges. The candidate should have an
13
appreciation for these, and a sensitivity to the uses and limitations of law as a tool for
correction of social problem.
18. Association and Public Service
The degree to which bar association work on committees provides an insight into the
qualifications of the candidate varies in each individual. It may enhance a personal
background.
Likewise, participation in public service adds another dimension to the personality of the
candidate. The degree of participation in such activities may indicate fairness, honesty,
industriousness, diligence, social consciousness and consideration for others.
19. The Judicial System
The judicial system is an integral part of our governmental system of representative
democracy. It is essential that judges to whom are delegated the responsibility for
administering the judicial system not only possess the professional competence and integrity
to perform their function, but also that they earn and inspire the confidence of the public and
the bar in the performance of their duties. Particularly in light of contemporary public
skepticism about government in general, and the legal profession in particular, the judge is a
critical factor in confirming visibly to all observers that the courts are administered in an
irreproachable, open fashion.
Board Approved May 25, 1978, as amended through March 21, 2002
http://www.chicagobar.org/public/attorney/judicial/guidelines.asp
©2002 The Chicago Bar Association. All rights reserved.
14
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
BACKGROUND - LESSON 3
Youth Summit 2005
The Challenge of Selecting an
Ideal Supreme Court Nominee
Cathy Ruffing, Centreville High School, Street Law teacher
Objective: Students will research the characteristics of current justices, list and explain
factors that influence nomination selection for Supreme Court justices, and use that
information to create a resume for an ideal Supreme Court nominee based on the ideology of
the current President and Senate.
Scope/sequence: This lesson should be presented after an introduction of the basic procedure
of nomination and confirmation procedure of Supreme Court justices.
Time Needed: One 90 minute block or two 45 minute blocks
Focus Question: What qualities should a Supreme Court justice have?
Materials Needed:
• Access to www.supremecourtus.gov/ or current justices’ biographies
• Choosing a Supreme Court Nominee – Handout A
• Article III, US Constitution – Handout B
• Supreme Court Nominations Knowledge Inventory – Handout C
• The Challenge of Selecting an Ideal Supreme Court Nominee: Directions – Handout D
• Chart – Characteristics of Current Supreme Court Justices – Handout E
• Ideal Supreme Court Nominee Resume - Handout F
• Essay/Evaluation – Handout G
Teacher Input:
• Pass out the sheet entitled “Choosing a Supreme Court Nominee” (Handout A).
• Begin class by asking students to respond to the first two questions
• Before they complete #3, hand out Article 3 of the Constitution (Handout B). Then allow
time to complete Handout A.
• When students complete Handout A, have students briefly share in a class discussion of
the answers.
• Pass out the “Supreme Court Nominations – Knowledge Inventory” (Handout C). Allow
students time to complete (individually, in pairs, or in groups).
• Review the answers to the quiz using the key provided.
• Transition to the next activity by summing up the importance selecting a nominee based
the ideology of the current administration and on balancing the court. The teacher should
review the major policy views of the current president (such issues as affirmative action,
abortion, prayer in school, etc.)
• The teacher should also explain that to balance the court, you must know the current make
up of the court.
• Either take class to the computer lab to access short biographies of the current Justices at
www.supremecourtus.gov/ or pass out previously copied biographies.
• Pass out instructions entitled “The Challenge of Selecting an Ideal Supreme Court
Nominee” (Handout D). Explain that they will first need to figure out who is the eldest
current Supreme Court Justice and assume that he/she has just retired.
1
•
•
•
•
•
Pass out the blank chart entitled “Characteristics of Current Supreme Court Justices”
(Handout E) and have students collect data on the remaining 8 current Supreme Court
Justices.
Divide students into small groups (3-5 students). Pass out the sheet entitled “Ideal
Supreme Court Nominee Resume” (Handout F). Allow students time to study the chart,
consider the president’s ideology, and create a resume for an ideal nominee.
Have students present their ideal nominees to the class.
Debrief
Assign essay/evaluation (Handout G)
Interactive Strategy/ Student Directions:
• Complete “Choosing a Supreme Court Nominee” (Handout A). Read Article 3 of the
Constitution to complete # 3 (Handout B)
• Take the Supreme Court “Knowledge Inventory” Quiz (Handout C)
• Read the instructions entitled “The Challenge of Selecting an Ideal Supreme Court
Nominee Directions” (Handout D)
• Research the current Supreme Court justices using the chart (Handout E)and the website
(http://www.supremecourtus.gov/) or biographies provided.
• Create a resume for an “ideal” Supreme Court justice for a current vacancy who would
reflect the current president’s ideology and would balance the current justices. Complete
his/her resume (Handout F)
• Present your nominee to the class.
• Complete essay/evaluation (Handout G)
Debrief: Debrief by having students discuss the nominees presented to them and their
positive and negative aspects. Then discuss how difficult it would be for the president to find
a person who possesses those qualities and a compatible ideology.
Evaluation: In a five paragraph essay, students will select their choice for Supreme Court
Justice from among the other groups’ nominees (not their own). They will analyze their
chance for confirmation based on their resume, the current make up of the Senate, and the
ideology of the president. The student should discuss the relative importance of ideology and
other characteristics of the nominees.
Extension: Before the writing assignment, have groups write at least 3 questions for each
nominee presented. Role play a Senate Confirmation hearing, having one student from the
group that created the resume acting the part of the nominee and the students from the other
groups acting as Senators and questioning.
Helpful websites: www.supremecourtus.gov/, www.uscourts.gov
National Standards for Civics and Government
9-12 Content Standards
III. How Does the Government Established by the Constitution Embody the Purposes,
Values, and Principles of American Democracy?
A.
How are power and responsibility distributed, shared, and limited in the
government established by the United States Constitution?
B.
How is the national government organized and what does it do?
2
Handout A
Name________________________________________________Pd.________
Choosing a Supreme Court Nominee
1.
Brainstorm – What qualities should a Supreme Court justice have?
2.
Look at your list of qualities above, circle those you believe are required by the
Constitution.
3. Read Article III of the Constitution. What are the constitutional requirements for
Supreme Court Justice?
4. Considering your answers to the above questions, what other factors do you think go
into selecting a nominee?
5. Do you think it is more important to possess the characteristics in #2 or to have an
ideology similar to the administration in office at the time of the nomination?
3
Handout B
Article III of the
Constitution of the United States of America
Section 1: The Judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and
in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The
judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good
Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall
not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
Section 2: The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this
Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under
their Authority; to all Cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls; to all
cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies between two or more States;
between a State and Citizen of another State; between Citizens of different States, between
Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a
State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a
State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all other Cases
before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and
Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall
be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not
committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by
Law have directed.
Section 3: Treason against the Untied States, shall consist only in levying War against them,
or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted
of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession
in open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of
Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person
attainted.
4
Handout C
Name________________________________________________Pd.__________
Supreme Court Nominations
Knowledge Inventory
1. True or False – A vacancy on the Supreme Court has occurred about once every two
years, so a president will probably have at least one appointment during his term.
2. True or False –The current justices get to vote on who will fill a vacancy.
3. True or False – The appointment to Chief Justice automatically goes to the senior most
justice on the court.
4.
True or False – Supreme Court nominees always have previous judicial experience.
5. True or False – Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was the first woman to serve on the
Supreme Court.
6. True or False – Justices are obligated to rule according to the ideology of the president
who appointed them.
7. True or False – There was a former president who also served as Chief Justice of the
United States.
8. True or False – The president has final word on whether a nominee will be confirmed.
9. True or False – Today geographical balance (where a nominee is from) is also
important when selecting a nominee.
10. True or False – You meet the Constitutional requirements for a Supreme Court justice.
5
Supreme Court Nominations
Knowledge Inventory - ANSWER KEY
1. True or False – A vacancy on the Supreme Court has occurred about once every two
years, so a president will probably have at least one appointment during his term.
True – Jimmy Carter was the first full term president who did not have an opportunity to
name a nominee to the court (1977-81). George W. Bush also did not name anyone to the
Court during his first term in office.
2. True or False – The current justices get to vote on who will fill a vacancy.
False
3. True or False – The appointment to Chief Justice automatically goes to the senior most
justice on the court.
False – the president may nominate anyone for the Chief Justice.
4.
True or False – Supreme Court nominees always have previous judicial experience.
False – Many of the most famous have had no previous judicial experience including 8
chief justices. However, all 108 have had experience in public service. Among members
of the Court in 2005, only Chief Justice Rehnquist lacked previous judicial experience.
5. True or False – Justice Sandra Day O’Connor was the first woman to serve on the
Supreme Court.
True.
6. True or False – Justices are obligated to rule according to the ideology of the president
who appointed them.
False – They are completely independent. In fact, many of them have “disappointed” the
president who nominated them by ruling more conservatively or liberally than the
president assumed they would.
7. True or False – There was a former president who also served as Chief Justice.
True – William Howard Taft – President (1909-13) and Chief Justice (1921-30).
8. True or False – The president has final word on whether a nominee will be confirmed.
False – The president has the power to nominate, subject to the “advice and consent” of
the Senate (US Constitution, Article II, section 2.) The Senate Judiciary Committee will
hold hearings and make a recommendation to the full Senate. A majority vote is needed.
9. True or False – Today geographical balance (where a nominee is from) is also important
when selecting a nominee.
False – Although 31 of the 50 states have been represented among the 108 justices to
serve, today there is no expectation of geographical balance.
10. True or False – You meet the Constitutional requirements for a Supreme Court justice.
True – The Constitution states no requirements for holding the post of Supreme Court
Justice.
6
Handout D
The Challenge of Selecting an
Ideal Supreme Court Nominee
Objective: Today it will be your job as an advisor to the current President of the
United States to identify ideal characteristics for an opening on the Supreme Court of
the United States. You will have to consider the ideology of the president, the
demographics of the current justices and the current make up of the Senate.
•
Complete “Choosing a Supreme Court Nominee” (Handout A). Read Article 3 of the
Constitution to complete # 3 (Handout B).
•
Take the Supreme Court “Knowledge Inventory” Quiz (Handout C). Correct answers
as your teacher reviews.
•
Take notes as your teacher reviews the ideology of the current President of the United
States.
•
Research the current Supreme Court justices using the website
(http://www.supremecourtus.gov/) or biographies provided. Tabulate the ages of the
current justices. Figure out who is the eldest current justice. For the sake of this
exercise, assume that the eldest justice has just announced his/her retirement. This is
the seat that will be vacant.
•
Using the chart “Characteristics of Current Supreme Court Justices” (Handout E), fill
in the information for the remaining 8 justices.
•
Move into small groups of 3-5 students.
•
Study the chart of current justices and the notes on the president’s ideology. Discuss
the importance of balancing certain characteristics on the court and the role of the
president’s and justice’s ideology.
•
Create a resume for an “ideal” Supreme Court justice for a current vacancy who
would share the current president’s ideology and balance the current justices.
Complete his/her resume (Handout F).
•
Present your nominee to the class.
•
In a five paragraph essay, select your choice for Supreme Court Justice from among
the other groups’ nominees (not your own). (a) Analyze their chance for
confirmation based on their resume, the ideology of the president, and the current
make-up of the Senate. (b) Discuss the probability that the President could find a
nominee like the one you chose
7
CLASSROOM LAW PROJECT
BACKGROUND - LESSON 3
Youth Summit 2005
US Government & Politics - Lesson Plan
Nominating Federal Judges
Rebecca Small, Herndon High School AP Government and Street Law Teacher
Objectives
The students will be able to explain the politics and political processes of court
appointments, interpret and analyze relevant charts, and hone and refine essay
composition skills.
(The charts and essay assignments are particularly helpful for students preparing for the
AP US Government and Politics Exam.)
Scope/Sequence
• This lesson was initially developed for use in an advanced placement course but is
appropriate for various classes and may be adapted to your class’s level.
• The lesson works best if presented as part of a unit on the judiciary, preferably after the
units on the president and Congress.
• Prior to beginning this lesson, students should be familiar with the Congressional
committee structure, committee hearing process, and Senate procedures (such as
filibusters) as well as the role and importance of federal judges.
Time Recommendations
• The complete lesson is designed for approximately 180 minutes of class time (either two
90-minute block periods or four 45-minute blocks). However, this time can/should be
adjusted based on the pace of your class and the amount of preparation students do
outside of class.
• Additional time should be allotted if you opt for an in-class essay as an assessment tool.
(A 25-minute segment of class is required if you plan to assign students the AP essay.)
Focus Questions
• What is the purpose of giving federal judges life terms?
• What factors should be considered in nominating and confirming a federal judge?
• What are the most effective techniques for accomplishing the objectives of the various
players (president, nominees, Judiciary Committee member, Democratic senator, etc.)?
• What is at stake in the appointment of federal judges?
Materials Needed
For the teacher:
 Answer key to discussion questions (included on page 3)
For the students: (Materials are included in the student packet for reproduction.)
 Excerpt from Article III of the US Constitution
 “Nominating Federal Judges – An Overview of the Process”
 Charts From Vital Statistics - (May be copied for each student or copied on
transparency for use with an overhead projection)
 Chart Discussion Questions
 Resumes of Judicial Candidates
1
Optional Background Research/Homework Assignment
• Have students research one or all of the current justices on the Supreme Court, noting the
political affiliation of each justice’s nominating president, the justice’s political position
(i.e. liberal, conservative, moderate), and the justice’s position on key issues such as
abortion, affirmative action, state rights, etc.
• Have students offer hypotheses about how the justices’ views on the Court compare to
the views of the appointing president.
o For example, Justice David Souter was appointed by President George H. W.
Bush, who believed that Souter was a moderate Republican. Justice Souter has
proven to be one of the more liberal members of the Court, who often sides with
positions favored by Democrats.
Interactive Strategy/Student Directions
• “Article III of the Constitution – Judicial Power”
o Distribute copies to each student and have them read the excerpts from Article
III of the Constitution.
o Encourage students to comment on the language. Consider the following:
o What is meant by “good Behavior?”
o What is the process for appointing a federal judge?
o Are there any formal requirements for the judges?
o Review the discussion questions with the students.
Alternative approach:
o Have students search through a copy of the full Constitution to find the language
relevant to court appointments. (Students should identify the language that is
quoted on the “Article III of the Constitution – Judicial Power” handout without
using the handout.)
o Encourage students to contrast the way in which the requirements for federal
judges are outlined as compared to the president and members of Congress. (For
example: there are no age requirements, education requirements, or citizenship
requirements for judges.) Challenge students to think of reasons for these
differences.
o Read the questions on the “Article III of the Constitution – Judicial Power” handout with the students and discuss the relevant issues.
•
“Nominating Federal Judges – An Overview” - Steps, Chart, and Discussion Questions
o Review the steps for nominating a federal judge.
o Distribute copies of the chart or use a transparency to project it for the entire
class.
o Have students analyze and interpret the chart. Use the discussion questions to
guide student analysis.
•
Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing Simulation **
1. Give students a foundation for the activity. Students are to assume a Republican
president is trying to get several judicial nominations confirmed by the Senate,
which is comprised of 51 Democrats and 49 Republicans.
2
2. Choose five students who will play the roles of the president and the four
nominees. For large classes, divide the remaining students into four groups. Each
group will play the Judiciary Committee assigned to conduct the hearing of one of
the nominees. Smaller classes should have the remaining students act as one
Judiciary Committee that conducts the hearing for all four nominees.
3. Distribute the resumes based on whom the students will be playing/questioning.
4. The president should coach each nominee in preparing the candidates to present
themselves before a Senate Judiciary Committee of inquiry. With the assistance of
the president, the nominees should prepare a brief opening statement in support of
their candidacy based on their biographies. The president should also help the
four nominees prepare answers for some of the questions they anticipate. Their
answers should be honest but crafted in such a way that they do not jeopardize
their chances at a confirmation. (The nominees should try to avoid answers that
may alienate the Democratic majority in the Senate.)
5. The Senate Judiciary Committee will review the profile of the candidate they will
question. The committee members should develop a list of questions to ask the
nominee during the simulation. There should be a variety of questions prepared.
Instruct students that they want to elicit information on the following topics:
o Background/age
o Qualifications
o Specific issues (abortion, affirmative action)
o Party loyalty
o Personal/character information
o Interest group endorsements
o Filibuster possibilities (issues that may be offensive to the majority of
the Senate)
6. The committee should choose a chair who will call the meeting to order,
recognize committee members to speak, and call for a vote to recommend or not
recommend.
7. Conduct the simulation. At the conclusion of each hearing the committee will
vote on whether or not to favorably recommend the nominee.
8. After all four committee hearings, the class will act as the full Senate and vote on
whether or not to confirm each, articulating the reasons for their votes.
9. Debrief:
o
o
o
o
Ask students what was realistic about this simulation and what was not?
What impressed them about each candidate?
What concerned them about each candidate?
How did they ultimately make their decisions?
3
Assessment
• AP Essay Assessment:
o Go to www.apcentral.collegeboard.com.
o See “AP US Government & Politics Exam” question index.
o Select 2000 Free-Response #2. (You may download a copy of this, print it, and
ask students to respond to it.)
o A grading rubric is also available on this site.
• Alternative Essay Assessments:
o Have students imagine themselves as president and list the qualifications of their
ideal judicial nominee. Students should focus on the factors emphasized during
the simulation. They should identify one or two key issues that might prevent
them from choosing a particular candidate. (For example, refusal to nominate
someone who is against the death penalty or someone without a formal legal
background, etc.)
o Alternatively, students could write a paper arguing for or against life terms for
judges. Students must understand the rationales for judicial tenure in order to
support or challenge the practice.
Extension Activities
• Have students research and hypothesize how the next presidential election could affect
the make-up of the Supreme Court, taking into account the current justices most likely to
retire.
•
Ask students to research/report on recent filibusters of judicial nominations at
www.jurist.law.pitt.edu.
•
CBS News Productions has a 45 minute program entitled “Hill vs. Thomas,” which
describes the very public and contested confirmation of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme
Court. Four CBS News correspondents provide their firsthand insights into the Hill vs.
Thomas case. Archival footage covering the events surrounding the heated Judiciary
Committee and Senate hearings presents the case from multiple viewpoints. This video
can be ordered at: www.films.com
•
Have a federal judge visit your class. Contact information for federal judges is available
at www.uscourts.gov.
4
Teacher Copy
AP Government – Nominating Federal Judges
Answer Key to Discussion Questions
Article III of the Constitution Discussion Questions
1) The purpose of giving judges a life term was to remove them from politics and to ensure
that they would view only the legal merits of a case and not make decisions with an eye
toward re-election or re-appointment. (To help students grasp the concept you may draw
comparisons to arguments for and against tenure for teachers and professors.)
2) Many argue that the impact of giving judges a life term has not necessarily insulated
them from politics. Judges are citizens who read newspapers and watch the news; they
can be swayed by public opinion as much as anyone else. Others believe that judges often
(but not always) appear to be loyal to the ideas of the presidents who appointed them.
Still, the Supreme Court has issued many rulings in the past that appear to go against
public opinion of the time, including the Brown v. Board of Education decision.
3) The purpose was to provide a check on presidential power. Today it appears that this
check, while real, does not occur very often. Fewer than 20% of all federal judicial
nominations are rejected.
Nominating Federal Judges – Chart Interpretation Discussion questions
1) This chart shows the demographic characteristics of federal district judges from the
presidencies of Johnson – Clinton.
2) Presidents choose almost exclusively nominees from their own party.
3) Most federal judicial nominees have previous experience as judges.
4) The number of women nominated has increased. More women are educated and are
attorneys today than before. Still, the number of women nominated is low in proportion
to their percentage of the population.
5) The number of African Americans nominated has increased. Democrats have been more
likely to nominate blacks. Affirmative action programs and the civil rights movement
have helped to create more diversity in the federal judiciary. Many argue that there is still
a long way to go.
6) The number of Asians nominated is very low.
7) The number of Hispanics nominated is low in proportion to the population but has been
increasing.
5
US GOVERNMENT & POLITICS
NOMINATING FEDERAL JUDGES
STUDENT PACKET
6
ARTICLE III OF THE CONSTITUTION – JUDICIAL POWER
“The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their
Offices during good Behavior.”
“He (the president) shall have Power, by and with the Advice and
Consent of the Senate, to . . . nominate, and by and with the Advice and
Consent of the Senate, shall appoint . . . Judges of the supreme Court,
and all other Officers of the United States. . .”
Discussion Questions
1) What was the purpose of giving federal judges a life term?
2) What was the impact of giving federal judges a life term?
3) What was the purpose of requiring the president get the support of the Senate for
federal judge appointments?
7