JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN COURT DECISION

Justice Elena Kagan Court Decision

The Role of the Court: Justice Elena Kagan Court Decision

Introduction

The Founders envisioned the judiciary as "least dangerous branch" of government, but activist judges have turned the courts into organs of political action designed to exercise a vast power over virtually every aspect of American life. Instead of fulfilling their duty to interpret the Constitution and laws as they can be written, the judges try, increasingly, to impose their policy preferences to the nation. Recent examples includes, a federal judge can be supported by administrative decree rather than federal law, to overturn an Arizona law that unambiguously enforces immigration laws already on the books and another federal judge in California, that creates a constitutional right hitherto unknown to gay marriage. To restore the rule of law in America, elected officials at the polls, legal experts and concerned citizens in this situation should oppose judicial activism and encourage the president to nominate judges constitutionalists (Woolhouse, 2009).

Discussion and analysis

The current delicate balance in the Supreme Court

Only four of the current nine justices have shown that they are usually loyal and consistent constitutionalists. The others are either liberal activist to the core or inconsistent in their approach. President Barack Obama will probably have a nominee to the Supreme Court more and more jobs for 50-60 federal circuits.

Supreme Court justice makes Conservative decisions

On the other hand, the impact of judicial attitudes in decision-making is significant; the Most of this research has focused on the political stance of the decision maker. The Judges of the Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal have been studying, with results consistent finding that the political orientation of judges (as a belief system) is a good predictor of the process of decision making (eg., conservative judges are likely conservative decisions). George ...