Module 4


 A friend says to you, “You’re a political science major… explain to me why filling RBG’s seat on the Supreme Court has become such a controversial subject.” 


Well Friend, I'm glad you asked. So the Supreme Court has a total of Nine Justices, who have a lifetime tenure which means that they keep their position until they die, resign, retire, or are impeached and removed from office. Which is a big deal because they are the most powerful/important judges in the nation, who are usually the last resort when talking about justice; not only that but there are also responsible for making sure each branch of the government (the executive aka. the president, legislative aka senate and house of representatives, judicial aka Supreme Court and lower courts) recognizes the limits to its power. Meaning they pretty much have the last say, for example when impeaching a president, the proses starts with the legislative branch, but ends with a supreme hearing, so if the judge ain't with it, then it won't happen. Like, in the history of time there has been only one supreme court justice to have been impeached (stayed in office) in the 18 hundreds, meaning that there has been more presidents impeached than justices. But aside from that, right now five out of the 8 justices have been labeled conservative, so if the 9th seat gets filled by Trump (labeled a conservative president) that would make the Supreme Court conservative with a 6 to 3 ratio, which would be the most conservative Supreme Court since like the early 19 hundreds. Which can be deemed unfair and idiotic because then the court would be on one end of the field making it harder for them to make decisions objectively and without a bias or favoritism. So the controversy then comes from the fact that this is one of the most important roles in our government, and already leaning to one form of ideology which can be unfair, and the fact that there is a presidential election coming up, so at this point what is the fair thing to do? Do we let him tip the scale with a conservative judge, or do we wait after the elections and see potus changes? If not then accept it for what it is because at that point we don't have a choice, or hope that the new potus has a better candidate? Like the problem is like both options seem like gambles with both parties wanting their person there, and with the elections happening the question of who then has the right to appoint if we are in the middle of possibly changing the person who decides that?.. over all its all idiotic because this not only gives these 9 people a lifetime power, but also like even when people get impeached they never leave office so whats the point, and so like its all idiotic. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Module 15

Article number one talked about the early stage of the election process. They explains how in order to cast a vote the states need to cast their own vote in the form of the electoral vote. The electoral votes are what directly decide who the president will be. these electoral votes are determent by the the number of members we have in congress, which depends on the amount of people each state has. Article one, just talked about the history and the logistics of the being of what is the electoral process. In article two, they then begin to take about how every member of the House is up for election along with the third of the senate. Which is something people don't really think about. I think that when voting all people are focused with in the President and his second, forgetting that the people in the house and in the senate are the ones that ultimately run this nation. For example, in the last article they quote the constitutional amendments which says, " The 12th Amendment st...
Read more

Module 10

Module 10  I do not believe it is surprising at all that the United States turned into a nation where its own citizens feel fear when thinking about going to a voting booth. I think given the United States history and the way it was built I think it makes sense that there is still a great divide amongst its people, which is probably the reason the White House has served as a reflection of its nation. While it has been said that the president of our nation is a racist and an unfair person, that doesn't mean it reflects everyone in the states but it does reflect the majority of the problems that we face in the states. The systemic racism that has disproportionally effected our nation is what the president has represented, not only that but he also represents everything that is wrong with capitalism which is what his presidency has highlighted.   Watching the film was a very hard thing  todo because I...
Read more

Module 7

Poll watching is an allowed practice whose purpose is to make sure that everything is working as it is supposed to during the election, and that everyone who is voting is in their right. I honestly do feel like it is important to have some type of monitor during the election to make sure the process is going smoothly. The person should only really be in charge of organizing the lines, and setting up, and checking people in when they get to their designated voting station, but I don't agree with the animosity that these "Poll Watchers" have had while in that position. The problem with this practice is the voter intimidation that can happen because of this allowed practice. The fear also comes from the great divide between the american people right now, the hostility that certain voters have had against their ‘rival’ voters. This tension is what makes it a very scary thing for people who are planning to vote.  The rules about poll watching have shafted throughout the years,...
Read more