Here's a very interesting piece in Slate about the increased press time our Supreme Court Justices are willing to engage in, and what they are - and, more interestingly, are not - willing to talk about.
I think it's good - the more the public understands the difference between judicial philosophies, the more likely they are to make an informed decision when they vote for the person who appoints judges, or the Senators who confirm them. Or, for that matter, when they vote for judges in the several states. (Moreover, I think that debate favors a more conservative, humble judiciary, but even if it didn't, more information for voters is usually better.)
But the pitfalls of loose-lipped jurists certainly exist, and are worth a pause to consider. Any other thoughts out there? Does increased time before the cameras risk increasingly politicizing what is supposed to be the non-political branch of government?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment