Today’s writing prompt on WordPress was to find an entirely uninteresting news story and consider how it connects to your life. Initially, I struggled because I find most news stories significant. However, this prompt reminded me of a time when I found certain topics, like Supreme Court nominations, uninteresting. Reflecting on this now, I realize how naive I was to think these choices didn’t matter.

Case in Point: Judge Neil Gorsuch

Justice Neil Gorsuch is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Here’s a brief overview of his judicial career and philosophy:

Judicial Career

• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit:
  • Nominated by President George W. Bush in 2006 and confirmed by the Senate
  • Served from 2006 until his appointment to the Supreme Court
• Supreme Court:
  • Nominated by President Donald Trump in January 2017
  • Confirmed by the Senate in April 2017, succeeding Justice Antonin Scalia

Judicial Philosophy:

• Known for his textualist approach to statutory interpretation and originalist approach to constitutional interpretation, similar to Justice Scalia’s philosophy.
• Emphasizes the importance of adhering to the text of the law and the original understanding of the Constitution.

Notable Opinions:

• Bostock v. Clayton County (2020):
  • Wrote the majority opinion that held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees against discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.
• Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. v. Sebelius (2014):
  • As a judge on the Tenth Circuit, he concurred in the decision that allowed closely held for-profit corporations to be exempt from a regulation its owners religiously object to.

Link to Newsweek article

Current Controversy

Justice Neil Gorsuch has faced criticism for his recent comments regarding President Joe Biden’s proposal to reform the Supreme Court. The proposal includes term limits for justices, a constitutional amendment to block the court’s presidential immunity ruling, and an enforceable ethics code for the bench. Additionally, the proposal suggests presidents appoint justices every two years, with justices serving 18 years of active service.

In a Fox News interview, Gorsuch urged Americans to “be careful” about making changes to the independent judiciary. He emphasized the importance of an independent judiciary for ensuring fair hearings under the law and the Constitution, especially for those who are unpopular or under government scrutiny. He highlighted that an independent judiciary is crucial for protecting the rights of individuals against majority rule and governmental overreach.

Gorsuch’s comments sparked backlash on social media. Critics, including former deputy assistant attorney general Harry Litman, questioned the appropriateness of a Supreme Court justice discussing political topics in public forums. Litman remarked on X (formerly Twitter) that Gorsuch’s interview was “remarkably out of line.”

Podcast host Jack Hopkins, who identifies as a “former Republican,” also criticized Gorsuch’s comments, interpreting “be careful” as a threat against the proposed reforms. He emphasized public support for the changes and warned against obstructing them.

In a separate interview with The New York Times, Gorsuch declined to comment on Justice Elena Kagan’s endorsement of a judicial panel to monitor justices’ compliance with the court’s ethics code.

Overall, the controversy highlights the tension between the judiciary’s independence and the push for reforms aimed at increasing accountability and transparency in the Supreme Court.

Link to AFJ article

A Personal Realization

I was so naive to think that the choices presidents were making when replacing justices didn’t really matter. I thought these people, with their impressive education and focus on the law, would uphold the values of the American people with integrity. But as I’ve come to understand the world differently and see things with my own eyes, I recognize how crucial these choices are.

The news I once found uninteresting should have been taken more seriously. The choice of Supreme Court justices is an important job and should not be taken lightly, as we are seeing that former President Trump manipulated the judicial system to leverage in his favor. It is scary and crazy that people in such high and respectable positions within our government are not always ethically behaved in how they decide for Americans.

This realization has profoundly affected me. It underscores the importance of being informed and engaged in all aspects of our government, including the judiciary. As I write my book about perspective, I understand now more than ever the value of seeing the world from different viewpoints. It’s essential for creating a just and equitable society.

Additional Points to Consider:

• The Illusion of Judicial Impartiality: Your observation about the perceived impartiality of Supreme Court justices is crucial. While justices are expected to be neutral arbiters of the law, their personal ideologies and interpretations inevitably influence their decisions. This is why the nomination process is so politically charged, as it can significantly alter the ideological balance of the court.
• Long-term Impact: Supreme Court decisions can have lasting effects on social, economic, and political issues. They can shape policies related to healthcare, civil rights, environmental protection, and many other areas.
• Public Trust: The perceived legitimacy and impartiality of the Supreme Court are essential for public trust in the institution. Controversies like those surrounding Justice Gorsuch can erode that trust.
• The Role of the Senate: The Senate’s role in confirming or rejecting Supreme Court nominees is a critical check on presidential power. It’s important for the Senate to thoroughly vet nominees and consider their qualifications and potential biases.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the choices we make, even those that seem uninteresting at first glance, have far-reaching consequences. The role of Supreme Court justices in shaping our society cannot be overstated, and it is our responsibility to stay informed and engaged in these critical decisions. Let’s not allow naivety to cloud our judgment and remember that every choice matters.