Nomination of American Justices

Nomination of American justices, as recounted by history, has been shrouded in political obscurantisms for over 200 hundred years stretching back to the creation of the great American nation. The American judicial system has become a victim of political exploitation depending on who is holding the reins of power in a nation divided along members having differing ideological thoughts and processes. Whenever there is a vacancy, the nomination of a justice to a bench depends on the political leaning of the prospective judge-applicant, his or her uprightness, professionalism, judicial disposition, philosophical thoughts, and level of expertise in constitutional law (Gerhardt, 1992). The most contentious judicial nomination in American judicial history was when Justice Clarence Thomas was nominated by President Bush and confirmed by the Senate as an associate judge of the Supreme Court of the United States resulting in widespread outcry that almost led to paralysis of judicial discussions. The president was empowered by the ‘Appointments Clause’ that allowed him to make the right choice in selecting Justice Thomas with the recommendation and approval of the Senate.

President Eisenhower who was a Republican nominated the highly influential William Brennan of New Jersey as an Associate Judge of the Supreme Court (Gerhardt, 1992) despite Brennan being a Democrat. Also nominated by Eisenhower were Justices Potter Stewart and John Harlan who were both strong supporters of the Republican Party. Eisenhower did so with the blessings of a Senate controlled by majority Democrats (Gerhardt, 1992). Partisan politics can be dangerous especially when it comes to the nomination and confirmation of Justices. Often, there evolve ideological divergences, political differences, and racial divisions when selecting justices.

Hudson (2010) opines that Congress is more knowledgeable than the selected members of the judiciary when it comes to obligating commerce power. Some justices have been known to pursue their own self-fulfilling agendas leading them to evade judicial conscientiousness (Dimino, 2005). I would suggest that the tenure of judges be limited to certain duration. Justices should not be allowed to sit on the bench until retirement or until incapacitation. There has to be a limitation on the number of years justices serve in the judiciary. Also, selection of justices should be representative of society since America is now a multicultural nation populated by people of walks of life. One other aspect regarding changes to the judicial system would require justices to be free from any political affiliation or alliance. I don’t see anything wrong if election of justices is left to the public to decide on an electoral basis.

References

Dimino, M.R. (2005). The worst way of selecting judges-except all the others that have been tried. Northern Kentucky Law Review, Vol. 32:2.

Hudson, W. (2010). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America's future (6th ed.), Washington, DC: CQ Press.

Gerhardt, M.J. (1992). Divided justice: A commentary on the nomination and confirmation of Justice Thomas. Faculty Publications, Paper 979.

             http://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/979

Voter Motivation

Voter motivation which is an act of pulling electors to a cause from a micro to a macro level so they can cast their votes still remains an essential factor in contemporary democratic elections. Understanding the philosophy of voter motivation to garner victory can be a vital tool and a way of triumphing over political opponents. In present-day American elections, parties compete to attract as many voters as they can by using all sorts of tactics at their disposal. Cases of voters turned away for failing to furnish birth certificates, identity cards, and other documents demanded by officials manning election stations in various parts of the U.S, pop up in the media now and then to arouse public opinion. Turning away eligible voters challenges the concept of direct democratic participation. Election irregularities are common in almost every democracy mainly due to humankind’s irrationality and hostile responses become part of the ordinary citizens’ ways of voicing political discontent. Some form of racial prejudice surfaced among black and white voters in the presidential election of 2008 when the Republican Party fielded political heavyweight John McCain against the youthful politician and challenger Barack Obama of the Democratic Party such that former president Jimmy Carter, in the glare of the media, came in support of Obama (Paine et al, 2010).

One tactical measure to enhance voter turnout would be encouraging voters to come to the polling stations to cast their ballots. Libertarian paternalism is famous for its self-conscious influencing application that is known as “Nudge” where attempts are made to move people to a certain direction that elevates their living standards without promises of economic incentives attached. In such cases, what is essential for the voter is not concern for party arrangements but concern for policy results (Kedar, 2005). Another important means would be boosting voter education so that people can have understanding of how the electoral systems work. Broad experimental literature is available that document how the ordinary American citizen is ignorant of the policies and the politicians that shape the nation. According to Kaplan (2008), though not an aberration, the number of Americans having significant knowledge of politics is alarmingly low and below the level required for an advanced democracy such as the U.S.

Political science scholars, borrowing a leaf from the application of bargaining theory, often cite the need for the allocation of distributable goods and resources and the examination of institutional designs as factors that alter voter behavior (Kedar, 2005). To the contrary, other political scientists reference proximity theory which is voter endorsement of the candidate sharing similar political views. Regardless of which theory is right, one major aspect that voters put into consideration when voting for a particular candidate, is the state of the economy. According to Hudson (2010), creating better voting procedures has been shown to increase voter turnout. People often vote according to their social and economic statuses. Improved voter turnout can be realized through civic engagement and through empowering citizens to have a say in political discourses. A reduction in adherence to class prejudice and lessening all sorts of barriers that restrict voter involvement should be top priorities for congressional leaders if they are to receive the trust and support of their constituents. Advancing mobile and internet democracy could also be used to eliminate political misconceptions and allow for the retention of diminishing party loyalty.

References

Hudson, W.E. (2010). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (6^th. ed).  Washington, D.C: CQ Press.

Caplan, B. (2008). Majorities against utility: Implications of the failure of the Miracle of Aggregation. Department of Economics, Center for Study of Public Choice, and Mercatus Center: Fairfax, VA: George Mason University.

Kedar, O. (2005). How voters work around institutions: Policy balancing in staggered elections. Electoral Studies, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. Retrieved from http://pluto.mscc.huji.ac.il/~okedar/files/ES-06.pdf

                                              

Payne, B.K., Krosnick, J.S., Pasek, J., Lelkes, Akhtar, O. & Tompson, T. (2010). Implicit and explicit prejudice in the 2008 American presidential election. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 367–374.