Recently the Legislative branch considered whether to try to expand the Supreme Court by adding 4 new seats to the Court to make 13 justices instead of 9 justices. The Constitution does not outline specifically how many justices must be appointed. Some have argued that this could "pack the court" with liberal justices. Others have argued that it might create a balance with the conservative-tipped bench presently in place.
Answer the following questions:
1) Are these two heads to the same coin, so to speak? Either way, what effects, if any, would this action, if taken, have on the long term requirements for the Supreme Court?
2) What are the pros and cons to expanding the Supreme Court, especially relating to its possible effects on judicial review? Give illustrative examples of what could happen.
3) Do you think this is merely a political move or a necessary move?
4) What are your thoughts on this issue? Is diversity an issue that should be considered?
5) Do you think the framers intended the Supreme Court to be expanded and or packed on one side or the other?
6) What can we learn from history about this? Has it ever happened before? If so, what was the net effect -- and why?
1.Are ethical theories relevant for ethical leadership? Explain.
- How should a police officer respond if the officer witnesses the unethical behavior of another officer?
Full Answer Section
- To make the Court more representative of the American people: The Supreme Court is supposed to be the highest court in the land, but it is not representative of the American people. The Court is made up of nine justices, all of whom are white men. Expanding the Court could help to make it more representative of the American people.
Arguments against expanding the Supreme Court:
- It would politicize the Court: One of the main arguments against expanding the Supreme Court is that it would politicize the Court even further. Currently, the Court is already seen as a political institution, and expanding the Court would only make this worse. If one party controls the presidency and Congress, they could use their power to expand the Court and pack it with their own appointees. This would make it difficult for the Court to be impartial and could lead to a decline in public trust in the Court.
- It would set a dangerous precedent: Another argument against expanding the Supreme Court is that it would set a dangerous precedent. If one party is allowed to expand the Court, then the other party could do the same thing in the future. This could lead to a never-ending cycle of Court-packing, which would be harmful to the rule of law.
- It would be unnecessary: Some people argue that there is no need to expand the Supreme Court. They argue that the Court is currently able to handle its workload and that there is no evidence that the Court is biased. They also argue that expanding the Court would be a waste of time and money.
The potential effects of expanding the Supreme Court on judicial review:
Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to strike down laws that it finds to be unconstitutional. This is one of the most important powers of the Supreme Court, and it has been used to protect the rights of individuals and minorities.
There are a number of ways that expanding the Supreme Court could affect judicial review. One possibility is that it could make it more difficult for the Court to strike down laws. If the Court is packed with justices from one party, then they may be less likely to strike down laws that are supported by that party. This could lead to a decline in the power of judicial review and could make it more difficult to protect the rights of individuals and minorities.
Another possibility is that expanding the Supreme Court could make it easier for the Court to strike down laws. If the Court is more evenly divided, then it may be more likely to strike down laws that are supported by both parties. This could lead to a more active Court that is willing to strike down laws that it finds to be unconstitutional.
The actual effects of expanding the Supreme Court on judicial review are difficult to predict. It would depend on a number of factors, such as the ideological makeup of the Court and the specific cases that come before it. However, it is clear that expanding the Supreme Court would have a significant impact on the Court's power to strike down laws.
Illustrative examples of what could happen:
One illustrative example of what could happen if the Supreme Court were expanded is that it could lead to a more liberal Court. This is because the party that controls the presidency and Congress would likely appoint more liberal justices to the Court. This could lead to a number of changes in the Court's rulings, such as a more favorable view of abortion rights and affirmative action.
Another illustrative example is that expanding the Supreme Court could lead to a more divided Court. This is because it would be more difficult for any one party to control the Court. This could lead to more tie votes and more uncertainty about the outcome of cases.
Ultimately, the decision of whether or not to expand the Supreme Court is a complex one with no easy answers. There are a number of factors to consider, and the potential consequences are far-reaching.