The Supreme Court vs the Federal Government - Essay Example

? (Assignment) The Supreme Court Vs the Federal Government In America, as Baum and Devins argue, the Supreme Court heeds more attention to the politicians, academics, and elites of the community than they do to the public opinion. This is more or less true about all Justices who cast the critical votes in most visible decisions of the court. In many cases, the vote goes in favor of the mighty and not for the common man. In a country where the principle of equality is taught, such incidents would defame the judiciary which is expected to be the custodian of the constitution. The prime reason why they are influenced by the politics, according to Baum and Devins is that the Justices are also from the upper classes and elite classes of the society. So, they are easily influenced by the ideas of other elites who are dear to them for personal reasons other than strategic reasons. As the greed of man for material things never ends, the Judges also give up their values and belief for the narrow cause of a little money or status which they can derive by supporting these malpractices. In order to please his men he manipulates all the loopholes of the law for their advantage. The Democratic Senate’s rejection of Robert Bork’s Supreme Court nomination and Ronald Reagan’s very subsequent nomination of Anthony Kennedy are often quoted as an example which exposes the fact that personal and public opinions directly influence judicial decision making (Baum and Devins). The opinions and writings of the judges also make it clear that the court is the product of its times. Moreover, some of them publically proclaim that they are not immune from the social as well as political pressures which surround them. Chief Justice Rehnquist admitted that Supreme Court Justices “go home at night and read the newspaper or watch the evening news on television; they talk to their family and friends about the current events” and, consequently, cannot “escape being influenced by public opinion” (Baum & Devins). However, this public opinion is not the opinion of the entire American community or the opinion of the party in rule but only the opinion of the leaders of the party in power. Here the interest of the whole nation is trashed and the evil intensions of a few are entertained. The selection process of judges is evidently political in nature. To illustrate, usually judges who make decisions on criminal matters are selected through election or appointment. The only difference is that while the judges of some states are selected by the voters, in other states they are appointed by the governors of that state. At this juncture, a lawyer who has carried out some political activities for the major political parties becomes their candidate for judgeships. Subsequently, a Judge who is having a special interest for a particular political party will be like a puppet in their hands and whatever judgments and verdicts he makes will be according to the directions and for that particular political party. Instances are many, though nothing comes out, to show that the rulings of the Supreme Court are in sharp contrast to the constitution. To be specific, whenever the court rules on matters involving interpretation of law other than the constitutional directives, a simple legislative action can subvert the decision of the court. For example, in 2009 Congress passed the Lilly Ledbetter Act, which replaced the limitations imposed by the court in “Ledbetter v/s Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.” case in 2007. Interpreting the constitution in the light of political ideology is extremely harmful to the country. What we see now a day is that America is heading towards an Aristocracy where the Justices along with a syndicate of politicians decide what law is and what is not according to their whims and fancies. Here the voice of the common man will be forgotten. If the appointments of the Judges are based on nepotism, incompetent people may reach on the top of the apex judiciary and they will become a liability for the nation. An occasion when the Judges face political pressure is when they make death sentences. It is a fact that elected judges are imposing more death penalties as compared to those appointed (The Politics of Criminal Justice). In any country, the authority to give death penalty is left to the discretion of the Judges after analyzing the nature and circumstances of the case. The interference of politics in it may result in hanging the innocent and in acquitting the culprits. Irrespective of all the allegations that the judiciary is influenced by the political ideologies, there some incidents which opponents of this view usually point out to show that judiciary outdoes the political motives and suggestions. Recently the Supreme Court supported an Arizona law that punishes the organizations hiring illegal immigrants. The decision of the court subverted the previous decisions of the federal courts which gave in to the demands of the political elites. Legal Arizona Workers Act was passed in 2007 allowing the state to suspend the licenses of the organizations that deliberately violate the ‘work eligibility verification requirements’. Under this the companies were required to use E- verification, a federal database to check the documentation of all the employees. Though many business people protested against this, the law was enacted hands down with the intervention of the Supreme Court. All the antagonists including Obama government accepted this as a step on traditional federal oversight over matters regarding immigration. For, America has started suffering from the evils of illegal immigration- immigrations of militants with fake passports and other documents were reported. Everyone who questioned the authority of the court to adjudicate on this matter was convinced of what the fate of America would be, if the awkward situation continued. The passing of this law gave more authority and role to arrest the suspected immigrants. However, despite such a few remarkable events, the court decisions seemed to lack soundness when politics is involved in them. There are instances to show the rulings of the Supreme Court when dominated by constitutional amendments. The eleventh Amendment toppled the case Chisholm v/s Georgia, the thirteenth and fourteenth Amendments reversed Dred Scott v/s Sanford in 1857, the sixteenth knocked over Pollock v/s Farmer’s Loan and Trust Co. and the fourth one, which in 1970 overturned some portions of Oregon v/s Mitchell, by the twenty sixth Amendment (Constitutional Amendments). These unfortunate incidents question the legacy of the Supreme Court and this legacy will severely be judged by the iron generations to come. In total, determining the rights and wrongs in a case must be left to the discretion of the judges. But in practical such discretionary powers are being utilized by the political parties. If the Supreme Court is granted a special or separate status it must be accepted and respected by all. The Judges may be bold enough to challenge the politicians, but for American judiciary, Congress is above all and the supremacy of the courts and judges remain confined to the theoretical interpretation of the constitution. However, despite the malice of the corrupted politics, court has to prove itself to be a trend-setter which would remain to be more progressive than any of the political ideologies. Works Cited Baum, Lawrence and Devins, Neal. “Why the Supreme Court Cares About elites, Not the American People?” Faculty Publications, 2010. 1116-1581. Constitutional Amendments. Chisholm v/s Georgia, Pollock v/s Farmer’s, and Oregon v/s Mitchell. Web 20 June 2011 The Politics of Criminal justice. Cliffnotes. Web 18 June 2011 Read More