After viewing the class video on
the Supreme Court, I was able to gain an understanding of the ways in which our
judicial system runs and operates in the United States. I now can appreciate
the basics of our judicial system and recognize the particular way that
justices must go about doing their jobs.
A portion of the video that caught my attention was several Chief Justices and law professor A.E. Dick Howard, discussing the way that the Constitution of the United States is neither a clear advantage nor a disadvantage to them when making decisions within the court. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy describes the idea as having an advantage that past justices did not. "We have 200 years of history, of detachment, in which we can see the folly of some ideas, the wisdom of others. So, the fact that we're interpreting a document that is 200 years old is not just a disadvantage. In a way, also an advantage". I agree with Justice Kennedy, because we can use previous cases and challenges in history, as guidelines of what to do and what not to do.
On the other hand, Justice Antonin Scalia disagrees, stating that "I don't think the Constitution has become anymore clear or means anything different from what it originally meant".
I think that it will always be crucial to take past events into account when coming up with new decisions. It is crucial because it allows us to steer away from repeating mistakes or from creating a problem.
Comments
Post a Comment