2006-10-07 03:05:09 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
I agree as they politic enough with the senate confirmantion committees! They should be held accountable to the voter
2006-10-07 03:23:08 · answer #1 · answered by paulisfree2004 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is a good question. Under the original Constitution, the only branch of government directly elected by the people was the House. Now with the introduction of an anendment (I forget which one) allowing popular election of the Senate, people now have a little but more say in government. They elect their Senators (though still only every six years), so they have influence over their decisions.
2006-10-07 03:28:57 · answer #2 · answered by zoralink3 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely not. There would be no way to do a formal review of the potential Justices' records "in public" since you can't get everyone there to qwuestion them, and the vast majority of Americans are not qualified to evaluate a legal expert. Unlike the President or the Legislature, the Supreme Court is made up of expert legal technicians, not representational persons. Their job is to conduct objective legal analysis, not subjective representation.
2006-10-07 03:14:59 · answer #3 · answered by Charles D 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That would be an excellent idea as long as the public is aware of all information concerning them. I'd also like to vote on them every 4-6 years instead of having them on the bench for life.
2006-10-07 03:20:34 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Might seem like a good idea, but I think it would require rewriting the constitution.
The privilege of every president is that he/she gets to choose judges and usually they are confirmed without incident. (that hasn't been the case lately however.)
2006-10-07 03:16:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No, because then they would have to go around making BS promises they could not keep, just like the other politicians. Best to tell your Senator who you want in there if you happen to know a good one.
2006-10-07 03:14:04 · answer #6 · answered by kate 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, they should be confirmed independent of all that otherwise they will pander to the majority to the detriment of minority rights
2006-10-07 03:14:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Yes indeed.
2006-10-07 03:14:19 · answer #8 · answered by edubya 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Yes, this is a great idea.
2006-10-07 03:12:32 · answer #9 · answered by Nancy R 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋