Why are chief justices of the US Supreme Court usually chosen from outside the court?

Answer 1

There are several considerations why a President would choose a chief justice from outside the 8 members of the Supreme Court itself (assuming there is or will be a vacancy by reason of retirement or death of a chief justice. ) .

First: He may want someone younger than the 8 justices currently serving on the court. Since a justice serves for life, the president wants someone who will represent his judicial philosophy for decades after he (the president) leaves office.

Second: The President may not agree with decisions of many members of the current court, even if they are of his own party.

Three: All of the eight men and women of the court , having been on the court for years, and authored many decisions, have a "paper trail" of their views and opinions, that would provide ammunition for their opponents in the US Senate, which will hold hearings on confirmation of a chief justice. Someone from outside the court may not have the same problems, even if they are an appellate court judge of other courts.

Four: It is not a sure thing that a justice would accept the offer of the Chief Justice position. It is a tremendous honor, and more prestige,but not more money , and a lot more work. And if a judge turned down the offer, it would become known and used against the president by the press and his political opponents.

Five: It might seem a given that a justice would be confirmed by the Senate. But it is not necessarily the case, if there are controversies, and the judge doesn't handle well the criticism and loaded questions by senators seeking publicity on television.

Six; A president wants to put his own mark on the court, and promoting a justice appointed by a previous president doesn't really give him the credit for the appointment. It might seem like the easiest way to get a quick confirmation, rather than willingness to really change some policies of the court.

Seven: The president actually WANTS various senators, congressmen and governors to come to him, and asking him to appoint their friends,....even if he won't appoint any of them. It is part of the process of nominations. Even if a hundred candidates don't really have a chance to get the nomination, there is a poltical advantage in those polticians being able to say that they put in a good word with the president for their friends and constituents. The same is true of influential law professors and scholars, newspaper columnists and pundits. It is all a charade , but an important one.

Eight: Most presidents actually have a "bullpen" of likely candidates for judicial offices , just as they have for other appointments.These are people who have been approved by the Senate for lesser judgeships, but have proven they can handle themselves well in front of the cameras and senators, and don't have any glaring deficiencies or skeletons in their closets that the press and the senate staff members could find the last time.

Nine: Even though it doesn't happen as often today, there have been presidents who have appointed cronies or old political allies of the president, who want the post. Today, most candidates for the Supreme Court have not been politicians, or held political office; but that was not always the case. (Lincoln's appointment of Salmon Chase as Chief Justice, or Warren Harding appointed former president William Howard Taft as Chief Justice, or Eisenhower appointed former governor and Vice-PresidentiaL candidate Earl Warren as Chief Justice, and Lyndon Johnson attempted to appoint his close political ally, and associate justice,, Abe Fortas.).

Ten: Occasionally, the president can just break all the rules, and find somebody totally from outside of the usual sources of judicial appointments. It hasn't happened often, but it is at least a strange possibility. Suppose a president named somebody today who had never been a judge before. Or even someone who had never even graduated from college or law school ? Impossible you say? Look at Justice Robert H. Jackson, Franklin Roosevelt's appointment as solicitor general, attorney general, and as justice of the supreme court.

Answer 2

Not always. Rehnquist was promoted from inside the court. But, there are advantages to being a chief justice and they have some influence over the court, so President who nominate the Chief Justice want their choice for Chief Justice to be there as long as possible. Members of the court are usually significantly older than new appointments so it makes sense that the President would nominate from outside the court.

Good question!

Answer 3

When replacing a Chief Justice, the President has to bring somone from outside to either the position of Chief, or Promote and then bring someone from outside to fill that spot. So either way he has to bring someone in from outside so it's beneficial to bring in a new chief who the President wants and will serve for life. The Chief has a very powerful position and can control much of what is done.

Answer 4

Ain't it a b*tch that the constitution seems to always block what you commucrats want. Maybe one day when and if you ever get into the White House while controlling both houses, your commucrat leaders can have the constitution abolished. I mean you commucrats always want something other than what the constitution dictates. If it's in the Constitution and a republican uses it, you say he is breaking the law. What law? Ohhh the communist idea law. If you commucrats think it's a violation of a law then anyone breaking your idea law should go to jail. God sure knew what he was doing when he allowed you hippie party members not to find LSD until the 60's

Answer 5

I would guess the same reason why US Presidents a chosen from outside of Congress. A fresh perspective perhaps?