Are Judges Politicians In Disguise?

Authors Avatar

Are judges politicians in disguise?

When reviewing the functions of the judges, and how and why decisions are made, there are many factors which should come into consideration. The judicial branch should interpret the law and constitution, and to make neutral and impartial decisions. Judges, in theory, should be fair, unbiased, neutral, impartial and not based or linked to any political party or movement.

However, it has been argued in the past that judges are too alike to politicians, as decisions made by the Supreme Court judges have, and will not be mechanical, but in a lot of cases too biased and political. This argument is strongly supported by the outcome of the major Supreme Court case, Roe vs. Wade. This case was a landmark decision which concerned abortion rights for women. Previously, abortion was a very questionable issue and was not allowed in most states. The case had to arguments put forward, one being ‘pro life’ which did not agree with abortion, and supported by the republicans, and the other being ‘pro choice’, which was supported by democrats. Which ever decision was made, the result was always going to be accused of being biased towards one political party, and therefore the neutrality and whether judges are non partisan, would be questions. The eventual decision was that the woman should have the choice, meaning the democrats view was supported and placed by the Supreme Court judges, causing debate on whether the decision was mechanical or political, and raising the issue if judges are too alike to politicians.

A main argument put forward that judges cannot be independent and partisan was when Historian  has claimed in his book  that the justices cannot be independent, as the members are chosen by the president and ratified by the Senate. Likewise, he says that they cannot be neutral between the rich and the poor, as they are almost always from the upper class.

Judicial review is a major function of the United Stated judiciary branch. Judicial review is when the laws, and constitution are questioned by the judiciary and their interpretation is checked. Judicial review is one of the greatest and most controversial contributions of the constitution to the law and government. Power of the Supreme Court to overturn any legislation or governmental action is deemed as inconsistent with the constitution, bill of rights or federal law. If judicial review causes a change in these laws, then the decision made is not likely to be mechanical, but to have a political swing. Also, the interpretation of the constitution is also open to bias by judges, again showing that judges could be too alike politicians.

Join now!

The Marbury vs. Madison case was a landmark decision that affected judicial review. President John Adams gave a last minute appointment before leaving the office to William Marbury as an official in the District of Columbia. The incoming Secretary of State James Madison who was responsible for these appointments didn't carry out that appointment; therefore William Marbury sued James Madison and challenged the Supreme Court to forceably appoint Marbury to the position. The Supreme Court decided that to forceably appoint Marbury to the position is something that the Constitution doesn't allow the Supreme Court to do. In making this decision, ...

This is a preview of the whole essay