October 01st, 2020

10/1/2020

Recently our United States Supreme court has lost one of it's members, Ruth Bator. The current U.S. president Donald Trump and the Republican party was quick to make a new nomination because of the election closing in soon. The Democratic party wants to wait until the election is over to select a new nomination so that the people have a say in whether it's from the Democratic or Republican party. Donald Trump as a nomination in place, Amy Coney Barrett. Barrett's confirmation process will take up to about two months. If Barrett makes it through the confirmation stage and takes the place of Ruth Bator, would this have been a good decision for the United States?

21 Comments

Johnathon

10/2/2020 12:09:58 pm

As the role of the supreme court is to interpret the constitution, not make laws to make new things legal or anything like that, it shouldn't matter which party nominates a new judge. Whoever is nominated should be able to understand what the founding fathers were implying with their values regardless of where the new judge falls on the political spectrum. Unfortunately, that's not how the supreme court is operating anymore. It has become judges interpret the constitution as it as written vs judges who will interpret the constitution how their political party wants them to. It doesn't matter which party the judge belongs to, if they are doing the later, they can not be a good judge. The seat left open by the death of RBG has been filled for a long time by a person who has done some great things for this nation but that seat has never belonged to her, it was just her duty to fill it for a time. As long as the new judge interprets the constitution as it is written not how the republican party wants it to be, she will be a great judge. It is the role of the president to nominate a new judge even if there is an election is four or five weeks. Both RBG and Obama have said things to the same effect in the past. Trump also has several more months as president whether he loses the election or not so I believe it is appropriate for him to nominate a new judge. If this were to happen in between the election and the inauguration of a new president, then I don't think it would be Trump's place to select a new judge.

Dillon

10/4/2020 04:08:04 pm

As you stated above, a good judge does not fall to pressure from either party. Their job is to follow the constitution as best they can. When regarding a nomination before or after the election, there should be little to no argument for waiting when it is the President’s duty to make a nomination whether they have four years in front of them or four weeks.

Eli

10/4/2020 06:12:26 pm

While there is a time of morning as you stated above a democratic president did state that it is still their job to elect a new justice even if there is not a long time until the presidential election.

Aidan Adams

10/4/2020 07:55:45 pm

Trump was chosen by the people to be able to chose who the next justice was. That’s all. Like it shouldn’t even be a question if Trump can do it or not.

Dillon

10/4/2020 04:02:29 pm

Whether or not Amy Coney Barrett would be a good decision for the United States is yet to be determined by how she serves our country for the better. A bad decision for our country though, would be leaving a vacancy on the Supreme Court as we face an election process that is likely to be full of conflict. It is the job of the president, no matter at what point in their presidency, to nominate a justice. The Supreme Court then votes to approve or deny the nomination. There are no regulations stating this process should not be done in the midst of an election. Many will agree with the ongoing nomination process and many would rather wait until after the election, depending on their party affiliation. Either way, as a nation we elected President Trump for four years, and it is his duty to follow the guidelines of the constitution. This would mean that the best decision for our country would be filling the empty seat as soon as reasonably possible.

Johnathon Simmons

10/4/2020 06:09:13 pm

Exactly. We elected him for a time and during that time it is his DUTY to do the things he was elected to do. This includes nominating and new judge.

Eli

10/4/2020 06:18:57 pm

It is the job of the president to try and appoint a new justice and President Trump has even taken the time to honor Ruth Bator. It may seem like he is trying to squeeze in this justice but he honestly has time, no matter how this election goes, but he just wants to make sure the democratic party doesn't try to delay it in anyway.

Blazen

10/4/2020 07:17:16 pm

Well put. I guess it is the presidents job to elect an new judge but I don’t think waiting two more months would have affected anything much more and it would’ve made the democratic part of the world a little more happy.

Aidan Adams

10/4/2020 07:53:08 pm

I don’t think the seat needs to be necessarily filled early. It’s not going to change that much since it’s only one justice. It would favor Trump to fill the seat as soon as possible though.

Caden

10/4/2020 07:57:20 pm

I agree that the spot must be filled for the sake of our country. It is indeed Trump's duty as president to complete this nomination during his term.

Eli

10/4/2020 06:09:08 pm

As Donald Trump's first presidential term comes to an end it may be uncertain to what responsibilities he can pursue as his term possibly ends. In truth that is wrong while sure his presidency may come to an end it may also not, and he has a right to be the best present he can be for four years. Has he but it in the presidential debate "We won the election and therefore we have the right to choose her (Amy Barrett), I'm not elected for three years, I'm elected for four years.", and his four years are not up. While it is true that President Trump must continue is job the best he can and must try to fill the seat at the Supreme Court I am not sure if he will finish the confirmation by the presidential election, but that does not mean he should slow up on his job because he may be reelected and then it would have been silly to slow down on his job.

Johnathon Simmons

10/4/2020 06:13:13 pm

Very silly indeed. Even if he loses, he has u til January to make sure everything is in place for Joe. So even if this nomination isn’t finished being confirmed until after election, there is still plenty of time to get that taken care of before Joe would take office.

Dillon

10/4/2020 06:17:42 pm

Any president in his shoes would do exactly the same. Like you quoted, he is elected for four years not three. He would not be properly doing his job if he took no action.

Blazen

10/4/2020 07:25:26 pm

His job is about to become slower than ever. As chaotic as the world is right now, the Supreme Court won’t even matter soon. If somethings aren’t handled soon we’ll have another civil war in the near future.

Will

10/4/2020 06:37:01 pm

Replacing the newly empty seat in the Supreme Court has become a decision influenced more by political beliefs than constitutional ones. In these past weeks the death of Ruth Bader has become a major focus point in the upcoming elections. With the Republicans believing that the seat should be filled as soon as humanly possible, and the Democrats arguing the opposite with the belief of waiting until the elections are over. However, these statements from either party are rationalized by their political views and will benefit the party if it falls through. Placing Amy Coney Barrett into the Supreme Court will lead to a heavy Republican court. This action will stay in affect whether or not Trump wins this next election. That being said, it is the president’s duty to replace the empty seat and given the opportunity Trump is playing within the rules of the game. He has also stated that he will use all fours years of his presidency to make decisions to better the United States. Whether that is true or not the consistution states that a president must elect a candidate into the Supreme Court after the absence of a previous individual. Examining and reflecting on this conflict within Washington, I believe that the action of replacing an Ruth Bader with Amy Barrett is constitutionally the right decision. Although when one try to interpret this problem through the eyes of their political beliefs, the right course of action becomes vague.

Caden

10/4/2020 08:00:06 pm

It is difficult to see the situation without any bias towards one's political parties. Yet while serving as president, Trump is expected to present a nominee to fill the empty seat.

Mackay Williams

10/4/2020 07:10:01 pm

President Donald Trump was elected nearly four years ago, whether a member of the Supreme Court was to pass away at the beginning of his term or the end, it is his duty in nominating a new member to take the seat. The new judge is then to abide by their role, appropriately interpreting the constitution. At this time we are seeing only a minimal amount of this action, our Supreme Court and media is no longer focusing on keeping the values of our country, instead they are more worried about what political party they fall into. As the time to vote counts down, this becomes more and more of a focus, yet we as the people have to remember, we elected president Trump for a four year term and he has months left whether he is re-elected or not. It is his responsibility nominate a person to fill the vacant seat no matter what party he/she belongs to and doing this as soon as possible is right for the country at this time.

Aidan Adams

10/4/2020 07:50:46 pm

The president has always been able to nominate new Supreme Court Justices for a reason. He was elected by the people to do this job so why wouldn’t he be allowed to now? It would be unconstitutional to take this power away from the president. The justices are also supposed to be honored in via the constitution not political parties.

Will

10/4/2020 08:02:59 pm

Not submitting a candidate to replace Ruth Bader would indeed be unconstitutional and disrespectful to our founding fathers. However it is only when political views are brought into the conversation, that constitutional acknowledgments become lost.

Caden Caywood

10/4/2020 07:55:45 pm

It is Trump's duty to carry out all presidential tasks while in his four year term. This includes nominating a Supreme Court Justice when a seat is empty, regardless if it is the end of his term or not. Although a conservative nominee being accepted would create a heavily Republican court, it is still expected of the president. We must all remember that either side wants what is best for their own party, but either way the seat must be filled.

Will

10/4/2020 08:00:31 pm

Just as you stated the seat must be filled and it is the presidents duty to fill it. To not carry out with this plan of attack would only further prove Trump’s uneducated decisions as a president.

October 01st, 2020

Leave a Reply.

Author

Archives

Categories