Tag: supreme court

Today we turn our attention to the 17th Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court — John G. Roberts.

At the time of his appointment in 2005, he was the third youngest to be appointed to the position. You need to go back to the early 19th century to find a younger man. So expect him to stay in this lifetime appointment for years to come.

He’s not flashy. Makes headlines by virtue of his job description. His views are often described as “Traditional”. Perhaps that’s a good thing. A little caution and tradition when dealing with issues affecting 350+ million residents is appropriate.

Expect him, and his co-workers, to make the several times this term. An important (okay, only important cases are considered at the court) decision on a portion of the Affordable Care Act (health care) is before the court. On a previous portion of the law Chief Justice Roberts cast the deciding vote. Will he do so again?

Stay tuned.

Do you want to interview a US Supreme Court Justice? Are you a member of a recognized media organization? May I suggest you approach Sonia Sotomayor.

While her workspace and sometimes her opinions are separate from the other justices of the court, she’s more likely to respond to requests from those outside of judicial circles.

Justice Sotomayor is only the third woman ever appointed to the court. Justice O’Connor retired three years prior to her confirmation. I can almost see Justice Ginsburg smile in welcome.

This lady’s path to her current position started in the Bronx and went through Yale Law School. Her father, a tool & die maker, died when she was still a child. Her mother, a nurse, emphasized education for both of her children. They are now a judge and a physician — the woman should be proud.

Several years as a prosecutor were followed by some time in private practice. It was her pro bono work at this time that brought her to the attention of politicians and a seat on the US District Court.

She’s the first Latina to sit on the highest court in the land. In her decisions she remembers her past and frequently votes with the “liberal” block of justices. This does not however, silence her own voice as she’s been known to write separate opinions and dissents in addition to casting her vote.

Integrity. Prudent. Cautious.

These are three of the words used by his peers to describe Samuel Alito prior to his nomination to the Supreme Court.

Justice Alito is a product of the East Coast. He was born in New Jersey, educated at Yale, and served in several positions within this geographical area. He’s also the son of teachers, a characteristic he shares with others on the court.

He was nominated to the court by President George W. Bush and took his seat early in 2006. His opinions and dissents fall on the conservative side of the issues of today.

The media coverage of Justice Alito is unflattering. All but the official biographical sketches dwell on brief breaches of manners — the sort of whispered word or facial expression that would be ignored by a non-judicial official.

It will be interesting if he happens to write any of the opinions of the major cases currently before the court. Then the public will have more actual thoughtful words to shape their own attitude.

Today we are at the mid-point in our introductions to Supreme Court Justices. Several things in this man’s biography set him apart. Some are obvious. Others not so much.

Clarence Thomas was born and raised in the Savannah, GA area. He is the only member of the court from the South, the only African-American, the sole member to have studied for the Roman Catholic priesthood (left seminary before ordination), and the only member discussed thus far to have not attended Harvard Law School. His law degree is from Yale.

Justice Thomas worked for a corporation prior to his first government duties, aide to Senator John Danforth. His first experience as a judge came in a US Appeals Court and lasted less than two years before he was appointed to his current position.

His confirmation by the Senate was widely discussed in the media. Some thought he lacked judicial experience. Others stepped forward at the hearings and introduced the term and concept of “sexual harassment” into public conversation. In the end, he was confirmed by a narrow margin.

Today he rarely asks questions during oral arguments, preferring to work quietly and within the confines of the court rules. His views are conservative. To the disappointment of many, this includes opposition to affirmative action.

Does it work? Will it have consequences beyond a narrow intention? Is this ruling necessary?

These are some of the questions which likely surface in bold letters for the topic of today’s post — Associate Justice Stephen G. Breyer. Two things he has in common with last week’s profiled justice are: born in California and a degree from Stanford. There are more, as you would expect with ambitious lawyers. Also many differences in the path taken to the Supreme Court and in their private lives.

Just for fun, lets mention of few of the steps on Justice Breyer’s path.

Raised in a Jewish home. An Eagle Scout. Married an English citizen. Professor. Assistant Special Prosecutor of the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. (Glad I never had a work title that long or complicated.) Judge at federal appeals level.

Practical and pragmatic carries into his personal life. This is the Justice most likely to be seen hiking or attending a sporting event.

He asks good questions.  Will this work? Will this last?

Today we continue our brief introductions to the sitting Justices on the United States Supreme Court.  I’m taking them in order from oldest to youngest and today we focus on Anthony M. Kennedy.

Justice Kennedy took up his duties on the supreme court in February 1988. Prior to that time he spent time in private practice, as a constitutional law professor, and judge. Immediately before his appointment he served as a federal judge inn the Ninth Circuit.

He’s the oldest, but not the only, current justice to be born in California. He’s the son of a lawyer and studied first at Stanford. Like several of his judicial companions, he also studied at Harvard Law School. He returned to California and centered his career in that state until nominated to the high court by President Reagan.

A formal tie remains in his assignment to handle emergency appeals from the West Coast, including the Ninth Circuit.

Justice Kennedy’s opinions and dissents through the years do not fit entirely into one column of either conservative or liberal. Is the case centered on the reach of government power? Does a social issue intersect with individual liberty? Best to wait until he hears both sides present the facts and deliberates. This is a justice whose opinions you do not want to “assume”.