Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
1. What are the ethical obligations of judges when it comes to political matters?
Judges in the American Courts are required to adhere to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. The primary principle of judicial ethics is in Rule 1.2 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct which states, A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety (Greenstein, 2015). With a specific focus on political matters, nothing in the ethics and the constitutions guarantees of free speech prohibits judges from making political commentary. In any case, under Canon 4 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, judges are allowed to speak, write, teach, and participate on any other issues that concern the legal system, the law, and the administration of justice. This notwithstanding, it is a judicial tradition within the American judicial system that Judges should not participate in public matters of public law and intra-court affairs. This could be regarded as the judicial lockjaw, founded on the need to avoid discussing issues that might one day arrive in the courtroom for determination (Westin, 1962). In addition, it has to do with public sentiments on how judges execute their mandate while at the same time staying above the politics of the day. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgs views on the candidacy of Donald J. Trump in 2016 may have been criticized as unethical. Still, in actual practice, the...
Should the Supreme Court weigh in on political matters of the day in a direct manner? Explain
No, SCOTUS judges should only participate on political matters of the day from a low viewpoint to render a self-explanatory commentary that should not be followed up with explanations, not in a direct manner. Politics is part of the SCOTUS judges based on their nominations, confirmation process in the U.S. Senate, and its ability to interfere in political disputes (Mazzone, 2018), e.g., in the Bush v. Gore decision and court decisions on appointment and re-districting, e.g., in Baker v. Carr. However, the supreme court must avoid the risk of stepping into popular political discourse directly, as doing so would nurture the idea that they are immersed in politics. Thus, the judicial decisions they make are in line with their political preferences. A perception of the supreme court as political would make it harder for the highly controversial decisions they make to be openly accepted by the public. The constitutional boundaries between the mandate of SCOTUS justices compared to that of Members of Congress and members of the white house are not entirely clear. Still, the public does believe such a boundary exists. Thus the differing ethical requirements for justices and political operatives; therefore, SCOTUS judges should be careful not to cross these boundaries.
3. Regardless of the ethical or other obligations of the Supreme Court, is it realistic…
References
Banks, C. (2020). Chapter 15: Criminal Justice Ethics (5th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishing. ISBN-13:9781544353593
Greenstein, M. N. (2014). Evolving Role of the Appellate Courts in Judicial Ethics. Judges’ Journal, 53(3), 40.
Greenstein, M. N. (2015). Innovations and Ethics. Judges’ Journal, 54(1), 40.
Greenstein, M. N. (2016). Judicial Ethics and Tribal Courts. Judges’ Journal, 55(4), 40.
American Politics Introduction to Kevin Phillips Kevin Phillips is a well-known, controversial yet respected writer and political analyst, who writes about the political and social world of contemporary America with a sense of literary style and an "at the bottom of it" substance. His most recent book, American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune, and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush, would seem to give the literary and politically uninitiated all the
American Politics Historically, the significance of the executive branch has increased during periods of war, crisis and economic turmoil, while the legislative branch has assumed greater responsibility during peaceful reprieves and ostensibly stable times. The relation between these two branches is complicated, but the increase of power and prestige of the president during crisis times must be approached in two ways: the president as a more efficient executive administrator of policy,
American Politics In the U.S. society, the political powers of groups are determined by the demographic and institution characteristics. The powers is divided into two models, these includes; the pluralism which was created by the Madisonian democracy and the elitism. Pluralism is a system where the decisions of politics are being made resulting to the bargaining and negotiation among the special interested groups. For this case, no one is allowed to
Not all money is illegal, of course, since politicians running for office need money to pay for their campaigns. But some money given to members of Congress is given illegally and influence is given illegally. And the benefits that the lobbyists receive is money and power and free trips and a life of luxury, in most cases. Take lobbyists, for example. The lobbyist is hired by a company or an
This rule is applicable to all states except North Dakota which does not require registration. Absentee ballots and mail ballot options are also available for voters who could not make it to the election booth. This is the election process in the United States. Problems of the local governments Local governments have a vital role to play in the country because they are the closest government body for the citizens. Despite
The critical part of this decision is its date - 2002. McConnell v. Federal Election Commission decided the manor in which the 2005 election would be campaigned, and while the political world blistered in post-9/11 heat, the Bush v. Kerry campaign was taking on such importance that the Justices' opinion would be immediately decisive in the outcome of yet another election. Although not as direct as their role in the Bush