Tuesday, October 17, 2006

"Unelected Supreme Court judges"

I agree with the campaign at Small Dead Animals and other conservative bloggers to keep the Court Challenges Program dead.
I just have one question: Why do conservatives always trash the "unelected Supreme Court"? No country has an elected Supreme Court. The U.S. and Canada have virtually the same appointment system, except the people picked by the President face tough questions -- sometimes -- at the Senate Judiciary Committee.
There's only one way to get on the U.S. Supreme Court: be appointed by the President.
Same holds for the major US courts.
There's only one way onto the Supreme Court of Canada: appointment by the Prime Minister. Same holds for the major courts in Canada.
Yes, Americans elect some lower and middle-ranked judges. But that's as far as it goes, anywhere.
"Unelected Supreme Court judges" is a garbage accusation. The Supreme Court of Canada can do some dumb things, but it's Parliament, not the judges, that decides how a lawyer ends up on the court.


Anonymous said...

I think the problem is when Supreme Court Justices make rights and laws out of thin air-- that's why the "unelected" aspect is important. If judges simply interpreted the laws as they were intended, then it wouldn't be a problem.

Ottawa Watch said...

Problem is, the laws are vague. When the Supreme Court says the laws don't work or violate the Charter, Parliament should fix those laws, not let the court make law, and take heat for doing so.
I take it you are pro-life. The court struck down the abortion law. Politicians have been unwilling to do anything about that. You could blame the court in the first few months after the decision, but politicians have -- for better or worse -- refused to do what it takes to make laws on this issue again.