Never Judge a Book by Its Cover
David Souter has announced that this will be his last session on the Supreme Court and that he will be retiring this summer.
Souter was nominated for his conservative views and Republicans had hoped that he would be a champion for the Right on the bench.
During his term as a Justice, however, he surprised all observers by not going along with political trends and by remaining faithful to the law.
This lead Souter to side with Liberals on many key cases and to become a truly independent vote on the Court.
Souter is a true jurist, in that he judges a case on its merits, not by his prejudices.
Most Presidents, when nominating a justice, hope that their candidate will push or support their agenda through the Court in their decisions.
That is not the purpose of the Supreme Court.
The Court is meant to be a check on both the Congress and the White House by being the one branch of the government who is to be objective and not subject to the whims of the public, to be the impartial arbiter of law and the Constitution.
While no individual is capable of being totally unbiased and predisposed, a judge, especially a Supreme Court Justice, is supposed to be as close to that as can be.
In that regard, David Souter was an excellent Justice of the Supreme Court.
While I have definitive Liberal leanings on most of the matters that would see their way before the Supreme Court, I hope that Obama finds and nominates a man or woman who is just like him.
No matter which side of the fence you are on, there needs to be a fair chance for any case that goes before the Court.
I would rather see a case that I support go before an independent and impartial group of jurists than one who is biased in either direction.
If the outcome of a case has been decided before it is even heard, then there is no point to the case being heard.
If the Court Justices are so firm in their leanings that they allow their bias to restrict their impartiality, then there is no point to there being a Supreme Court.
It is the charge of every President to nominate the best candidate for the job, period.
That is not a political lackey or patsy.
I will be watching the nomination to see if Obama respects the law and the Constitution more than his own political and ideological views; if he takes his duty to uphold the Constitution seriously.
A truly great President will; so let's see if this is one of the markers that show Obama to be a truly great President or become yesterday's news.
Souter was nominated for his conservative views and Republicans had hoped that he would be a champion for the Right on the bench.
During his term as a Justice, however, he surprised all observers by not going along with political trends and by remaining faithful to the law.
This lead Souter to side with Liberals on many key cases and to become a truly independent vote on the Court.
Souter is a true jurist, in that he judges a case on its merits, not by his prejudices.
Most Presidents, when nominating a justice, hope that their candidate will push or support their agenda through the Court in their decisions.
That is not the purpose of the Supreme Court.
The Court is meant to be a check on both the Congress and the White House by being the one branch of the government who is to be objective and not subject to the whims of the public, to be the impartial arbiter of law and the Constitution.
While no individual is capable of being totally unbiased and predisposed, a judge, especially a Supreme Court Justice, is supposed to be as close to that as can be.
In that regard, David Souter was an excellent Justice of the Supreme Court.
While I have definitive Liberal leanings on most of the matters that would see their way before the Supreme Court, I hope that Obama finds and nominates a man or woman who is just like him.
No matter which side of the fence you are on, there needs to be a fair chance for any case that goes before the Court.
I would rather see a case that I support go before an independent and impartial group of jurists than one who is biased in either direction.
If the outcome of a case has been decided before it is even heard, then there is no point to the case being heard.
If the Court Justices are so firm in their leanings that they allow their bias to restrict their impartiality, then there is no point to there being a Supreme Court.
It is the charge of every President to nominate the best candidate for the job, period.
That is not a political lackey or patsy.
I will be watching the nomination to see if Obama respects the law and the Constitution more than his own political and ideological views; if he takes his duty to uphold the Constitution seriously.
A truly great President will; so let's see if this is one of the markers that show Obama to be a truly great President or become yesterday's news.
