For Supreme Court justices the selection process is slightly different in that the Minister of Justice convenes the selection panel (constitution is defined in law)
1.the President of the UKSC, who will be the chair of the selection commission;
2.a senior UK judge (who is not a UKSC Justice) nominated by the President of the UKSC;
3.a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission for England & Wales;
4.a member of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland; and
5.a member of the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission.
Members of the JAC are senior civil servants and by law must remain politically neutral.
Whilst the Civil Service oversees selection, politicians are kept out of it. Individuals apply for the advertised roles, there are no political nominations and justices don’t serve for life.
He can’t, he can only nominate them. Then the Senate, a separate branch of government, investigates, and approves them. It doesn’t have to be a rubber stamp, and in the past it often hasn’t been.
The government is an inherently political system, you can’t avoid that. The Founding Fathers tried to split the approval responsibility (for many offices) between two branches, to avoid these issues. They were counting on the voters and the integrity of the members to keep things within reason, and it was a reasonably successful system for a long time.
The problem is that it relies on the good faith of the people managing it, and they Founding Fathers never anticipated that our country would be taken over be an international cabal of Sociopathic Oligarch pedophiles and traitors, who would exploit our nation’s honor system.
It wouldn’t be so bad if our government weren’t absolutely ratfucked by the two party FPTP system. There’s no incentive to not pick an extremist who aligns with your political ideology if your political party holds the majority of government offices.
And this is where ensuring total independence of the judiciary comes in.
Its insane to me that the president can pick a Supreme Court judge.
Who else should pick judges except for another branch of government?
This is how we do it in the UK.
https://www.judiciary.uk/about-the-judiciary/our-justice-system/jud-acc-ind/jud-appts/
For Supreme Court justices the selection process is slightly different in that the Minister of Justice convenes the selection panel (constitution is defined in law)
1.the President of the UKSC, who will be the chair of the selection commission; 2.a senior UK judge (who is not a UKSC Justice) nominated by the President of the UKSC; 3.a member of the Judicial Appointments Commission for England & Wales; 4.a member of the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland; and 5.a member of the Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission.
Members of the JAC are senior civil servants and by law must remain politically neutral.
Whilst the Civil Service oversees selection, politicians are kept out of it. Individuals apply for the advertised roles, there are no political nominations and justices don’t serve for life.
He can’t, he can only nominate them. Then the Senate, a separate branch of government, investigates, and approves them. It doesn’t have to be a rubber stamp, and in the past it often hasn’t been.
Interesting, but that is still very political. The judges are effectively being selected by people who will do what Trump tells them to
The government is an inherently political system, you can’t avoid that. The Founding Fathers tried to split the approval responsibility (for many offices) between two branches, to avoid these issues. They were counting on the voters and the integrity of the members to keep things within reason, and it was a reasonably successful system for a long time.
The problem is that it relies on the good faith of the people managing it, and they Founding Fathers never anticipated that our country would be taken over be an international cabal of Sociopathic Oligarch pedophiles and traitors, who would exploit our nation’s honor system.
It wouldn’t be so bad if our government weren’t absolutely ratfucked by the two party FPTP system. There’s no incentive to not pick an extremist who aligns with your political ideology if your political party holds the majority of government offices.