Peacock Tales
Volume 19, Number 3 · July 2009Confirming a Supreme Court Justice
The process will take center stage this summer as the U.S. Senate holds its hearings
For those who fashion themselves as Supreme Court watchers, and even for the casual observer, this summer promises to be filled with intense reporting on the hearings that will be conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee as its members consider the qualifications of Judge Sandra Sotomayor, the first Hispanic ever nominated to the United States Supreme Court.
This article will be the first of two installments in Peacock Tales providing a brief overview of the federal court system. Because of the ongoing events involving the resignation of one Justice and the nomination of a replacement, we felt it timely to start at the top with a discussion about the Supreme Court.
As the judicial branch of the federal government, the Supreme Court serves to balance the powers of the legislative and executive branches. It stands as the final word in any given legal dispute. Once the Supreme Court has made a decision, no other court can review or overturn that decision. Thus, given the Court's ultimate authority on judicial matters in the United States, the Justices who serve on the Court have a great deal of power as their decisions can affect the lives of many Americans. Such power makes the confirmation of a Supreme Court Justice a very important, as well as historical, process.
The nine Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of the United States under Article III of the United States Constitution, subject to majority approval by the Senate. Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life and can only be removed through the impeachment process. They never have to face election or re-confirmation and they do not have to decide cases in a way which will necessarily please the President who appointed them. In fact, their lifetime appointment is supposed to free them from political pressures.
Although there are no special qualifications to become a Supreme Court Justice, those who are nominated are typically very accomplished private or government lawyers, judges in state courts or even law professors. Governors and even one former president of the United States (William Howard Taft) have served as Justices of the high court.
Once a president nominates an individual the Senate must vote to confirm the nomination. Since 1925, the Senate vote has usually been preceded by hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee during which senators question the nominee on his or her judicial record, if any, and his/her approach to constitutional issues.
Various factors are considered by the president and his advisers when they choose a nominee. Apart from the president's desire for ideological compatibility with his nominee, the principal factor is the likelihood of a nominee being confirmed. Often, presidents will nominate a friend or acquaintance, people they know and trust. Age also matters as presidents often prefer nominees under the age of 60 who will be able to serve on the high court for 25 or 30 years. Religion, too, has weighed in presidents' decisions. In 1956, President Eisenhower, seeking to curry favor with Catholic voters, chose a Catholic, William Brennan, for a vacancy on the Court. And with the current vacancy, it can be said, too, that ethnicity sometimes plays a role.