In the 20th century, the spot of Chief Justice was filled by politicians who had formerly been (1) Senator, (2) President, (3) Governor & presidential candidate, (4) attorney general, (5) Senator, (6) Governor & VP candidate, and (7 & 8 both) party activist and assistant attorney general
Are you saying that Warren thinking more of the ramifications politically lead to more moderate decisions than Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh's revenge tour?
I guess the idea is that politicians will have the flexibility to balance the law with its practical implications.
The dread of bad peer reviews and being let off scot-free when defying public opinion, allows lawyers to argue for whatever side serves their personal interest.
In our country, the last political appointment to the Supreme Court, Sir Garfield Barwick, was a negative contributor.
These days, we appoint slightly conservative legal icons who will follow precedent and apply consistent principles to their reading of laws and the Constitution.
Non-doctors *are* mandatory members of ethics committees who make decisions about what treatments and clinical trials get approved, and laypeople serve as lay judges and as jurors in court trials?
And regardless of how some felt about Earl Warren, you get the feeling his political skills helped unite the Court and allow it to speak with more clarity. The current CJ is, at best, a crossing guard.
For the assembled worthies' consideration: Roger Taney was the worst Chief Justice of the United States until Citizens United, at which point John Roberts began his inexorable journey into outdoing Taney in horrificness.
Expect even worse as we hit 2025, Roberts' 20th anniversary as Chief Justice.
Technically, SC Justices don't have to be attorneys, per the Constitution. I feel like this is a dangerous loophole that has never been exploited, but that I may see exploited before I die.
The "Air Bud-ing" of the Court.
Tiffany seems to stay out of everyone's way, and I'll settle for that. She still has to hang around with the old shitbird to keep the money tap on, though.
When DT goes, we'll never see Melania again. She'll retire to a walled estate on the Adriatic after her debrief with the FSB.
Did that really lead past generations to regard the Supreme Court as comprising political actors doing politics, or might is it just past generations’ idealism about public servants acting in the public good?
Ok, I’ll bite. Vinson’s political experience was a hazard (e.g. Steel Seizure consultation with HT). White’ main experience was 16 years assoc justice. Senate for 3 years and time in confederacy not a benefit. Burger had over a decade as COA judge so “activist” no more than many other judges…1/
Rehnquist, despite not being politician, ran the court pretty well. Clearly benefitted from Burger being terrible. But his success in part was due to O’Conner’s political skill, which I think confirms your general point. The move away from at least some politicians on Court is a problem. 2/
But Vinson’s case shows real problems of politicians too (as do other assoc justice examples). Be careful of what you wish for. It could be Chief Justice Cruz or Hawley. End/
