Has the Supreme Court become too partisan?

During Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process, multiple women came forward to accuse him of sexually assaulting them while they were in high school and college. These claims have sparked nationwide debate over whether Kavanaugh ought to be confirmed to the nation’s high court.

When the Constitution was initially written, the Supreme Court was by far the weakest of the three branches (it did not even have its own building to meet in until 1935). Thus, the Founding Fathers did not envision the Supreme Court becoming a politically divisive branch. However, the judicial branch became increasingly powerful over the centuries and, in the modern day, the Supreme Court possesses immense political strength.

In the past, the Senate would usually confirm whatever candidate the President appointed to the high court as long as he or she possessed sufficient experience and knowledge. However, as the Supreme Court has gained power, the process for selecting new justices has become increasingly partisan. In the past few decades, there have been multiple appointees where senators generally vote along party lines. This trend has continued at the present as almost all Republicans voted to approve Judge Kavanaugh, with Democrats nearly unanimously opposing him.

Those who support voting for justices along party lines claim that partisanship will always be a part of the judiciary branch to some extent. They argue the Senate ought to appoint a judge with a similar ideology of whichever party has a majority in order to represent the will of the people. However, those on the other side argue that high levels of partisanship should not exist in the Supreme Court. They believe this prevents compromise and runs counter to the original intention of the court being a neutral arbiter of the law. What do you think? Has the Supreme Court become too partisan?

Current Standings:
Yes: 77%
No: 23%
  • Monica from Virginia

    The justices on our Supreme Court are not voting based on their own views and opinions they are voting to match their party.

    1
    • Arrington from Georgia

      I agree with your view. Justices are to afraid to make waves for fear of being ostracized by their parties.

      0
    • Lane from Kansas

      I both agree and disagree with the point you make. Yes, it seems on both sides that justices are voting in party lines; however, remember that these justices were appointed by a strongly political office. Often times, Republican presidents will select a stronger origionalist, whereas a Democrat will select someone with more support of the “living, breathing constitution.” Now both of these interpretations of the constitution have their ups and downs, but neither should be considered unjustified. I would argue that the court reflects the people of the United States, no one can agree on everything, including interpretations of the constitution.

      [read less]

      I both agree and disagree with the point you make. Yes, it seems on both sides that justices are voting in party lines; however, remember that these …

      [read more]
      0
    • Elizabeth from Kentucky

      The Supreme Court was founded on the idea that it would maintain the constitutionality of bills passed and debated and signed into laws. Therefore, there should be no place for voting to please your party in this judicial process. There will always be a bias to elect judges based on party and the power they possess, however, it has evolved into extreme corruption. Kavanaugh, for example, holds power in the Supreme Court and will vote with the Republican party. Although, no person who has been accused of sexual assault multiple times with evidence against them belongs in the Supreme Court or any political position. This is just one example out of many where this has happened and we, as citizens, need to advocate for a change.

      [read less]

      The Supreme Court was founded on the idea that it would maintain the constitutionality of bills passed and debated and signed into laws. Therefore, th…

      [read more]
      0
  • Geena from Kentucky

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Republicans and Democrats are reluctant to eachothers’ opinions. Everyone has to argue about everything in the Supreme Court, which prevents compromise. Nothing can ever get done because everyone is so headstrong. Both parties need to come and work together to make our nation unite.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Republicans and Democrats are reluctant to eachothers’ opinions. Everyone has to argue about ever…

    [read more]
    1
  • Andrew from New Jersey

    The Supreme Court has a history of deciding horrible rulings, such as Dredd Scott v. Sanford and Plessy v. Ferguson, as well as legislating from the bench, such as Roe v. Wade and Fischer v. Texas. It also has a history of overturning past precedent, such as the Janus case that was recently overturned after 40 years of labor union precedent. It has already become far too political and partisan, and nothing will be able to change that reality after the contentious confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has a history of deciding horrible rulings, such as Dredd Scott v. Sanford and Plessy v. Ferguson, as well as legislating from the b…

    [read more]
    1
  • Trinity from California

    I think whether it is states as such or not, partisan judges will always be present because the power lies in the two parties. Therefore whichever party is in power is going to sway which Supreme Courts judges are elected and what their agendas are. However, I don’t think this should be the case, since Supreme Court judges are supposed to be unbiased, except in moral absolutes and Constitutional values.

    [read less]

    I think whether it is states as such or not, partisan judges will always be present because the power lies in the two parties. Therefore whichever par…

    [read more]
    1
  • Seth from Kentucky

    I believe the Supreme Court has become very partisan. After the recent confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh, the current Republican to Democrat ratio is 5:4, giving the Republicans the majority. For a very long time now, the majority party has used its advantage to win Supreme Court cases. Support for how detrimental not having a majority is to a party is the Republicans refusing to allow President Obama to fill the open Supreme Court seat in 2016. While it is true that when judges are confirmed, they are not supposed to favor their party, but this is not the case. The judges are rarely seen voting for the other party; this includes the Democrats. A majority of your party is key to getting the desired outcome. This is not a recently occurring event either; Dred Scott v. Sanford is a prime example of this. The voting of the case was 7-2 in favor of Sanford. All seven of the votes came from Democratic judges while the other two were for Dred Scott; not one changed based off their party’s views. Recently, it is rare to see a judge change their opinion to the opposite of their party.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court has become very partisan. After the recent confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh, the current Republican to Democrat ratio is …

    [read more]
    0
  • Emma from Kentucky

    I think the supreme court has become too partisan. Justices should be fairly neutral and now they are being chosen based on their beliefs.

    0
  • Samuel from Idaho

    Justices most likely belong to two parties; Republican or Democrat they are loyal to either. Our founding fathers did not want parties in congress because they said the members of the parties would become loyal to the special interests of the party and not the people, and eventually there would be very few parties making up congress, and the will of the people would be swayed by the few parties, not the parties being influenced by the people

    [read less]

    Justices most likely belong to two parties; Republican or Democrat they are loyal to either. Our founding fathers did not want parties in congress bec…

    [read more]
    0
  • Denise from Utah

    The Supreme Court is too partisan and it is in part to the way they are chosen and approved. Those are both very partisan methods so how could they not be?

    0
  • Dylan from Georgia

    During the highly controversial case of Bush V Gore (2000), the state of Florida was the hanging thread in the decision of who our president shall be. The vote between Gore and Bush was so close, (with Bush leading only about 1,800 votes ahead of Gore the morning after), Florida court-ordered a manual recount of the vote to ensure the process had been secure. The request appeared simple and understandable. Once this case was presented to the Supreme Court, the justices among themselves almost indistinguishably voted with a partisan bias and considered the recount “unconstitutional.” This drastic claim against the recount itself comes off rather partisan based than constitutional based. This same partisan bias is universal and isn’t associated to one party, There are plenty of examples over the course of our history as a nation where partisan bias is present. The question is, why is partisan bias found to be repulsive in the first place? The reason why it should be disregarded in the Supreme Court is rather clear, the job of the justices are to follow our constitution and context of the situation, without partisan bias.

    [read less]

    During the highly controversial case of Bush V Gore (2000), the state of Florida was the hanging thread in the decision of who our president shall be….

    [read more]
    0
  • Tyler from Pennsylvania

    In the process of electing, the representatives voting will always follow their party. Whatever their party sees, the rep will then follow. No one will vote across party lines even if they do not think it is right. That is why the voting process is so tight anymore.

    [read less]

    In the process of electing, the representatives voting will always follow their party. Whatever their party sees, the rep will then follow. No one wil…

    [read more]
    0
  • ismatu from Virginia

    Yes, I believe the Supreme Court over the years has been too partisan. The Supreme Court is supposed to serve as an unbiased middle ground for laws and in any circumstance that they fail to do so, they become biased in their acts of purpose and duty. In the case of the sexual assault case, they overlooked the fact that this man could have indeed sexually assaulted these women just because he still met the credentials to serve on the Supreme Court Justice.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe the Supreme Court over the years has been too partisan. The Supreme Court is supposed to serve as an unbiased middle ground for laws an…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ben from Idaho

    When we speak of the nomination of Supreme Court justices, we often use the phrase “packing the court,” a practice involving a standing Congress and President filling up Supreme court seats with nominees they deem preferable.

    It is fairly clear that Congress members and the President are elected on a party system. When these partisan elected officials “pack the court,” they attempt to find acceptable justices. Usually, to be an acceptable justice, one must be considered a “conservative” or “liberal” justice. One must be desirable to the partisan legislative and executive bodies.

    Sometimes, though not often, a “constitutional” justice is nominated. These judges often vote less along party lines. However, justices of this type are not so common on the Supreme Court nowadays, with the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy (who often was the deciding vote).

    This is a very clear indication of a Supreme Court that is tending towards partisan rulings.

    [read less]

    When we speak of the nomination of Supreme Court justices, we often use the phrase “packing the court,” a practice involving a standing Congress and P…

    [read more]
    0
  • Nicole from Virginia

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. I believe that this fault has mainly come from the fact that the President is the one to nominate a candidate for the job; and although the legislative branch checks this power by having the ability to refuse a candidate, that fact still remains that only six Supreme Court nominees has been rejected since WW!!. Throughout history, the President has nearly always chosen a justice along party lines, or someone who will sway cases in favor of the President’s belief.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. I believe that this fault has mainly come from the fact that the President is the one to nom…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sam from Massachusetts

    The Supreme Court has become increasingly partisan, especially since the nuclear option was introduced in 2013, since it now allows confirmation with only 51 votes, making it much easier to vote along party lines as long as said party is the majority. This also has much to do with the justices themselves, and the immense power the Supreme Court now wields. Questions like, “What are your thoughts on Roe v Wade?” are, for the most part, partisan questions, and unless they are discussed purely based on the proceedings of the case, are a matter of political belief rather than judicial acumen.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become increasingly partisan, especially since the nuclear option was introduced in 2013, since it now allows confirmation with …

    [read more]
    0
  • Nicholas from California

    The current state of the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Because of the way most Supreme Court nominees have to be confirmed by the senate, the bitter partisanship that we see in the senate is transferred upon the court. Although the Supreme Court has to respect the constitution the partisanship is breed from the interpretation of the constitution to fit the respective party whom nominated and confirmed the individual.

    [read less]

    The current state of the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Because of the way most Supreme Court nominees have to be confirmed by the senate, the…

    [read more]
    0
  • emma from Michigan

    Supreme Courts aren’t voting to their own views they are voting to support the party

    0
  • Margaret from Virginia

    Due to the nature of the Supreme Court I think that it has definitely become too partisan. Because the president nominates the new Supreme Court justice, if several justices leave the Supreme Court during one presidential term. (Such that has happened in the past couple years) the reining president has the power to appoint justices that are aligned with their party to the most extreme extent. This is especially true when the senate is aligned with the current president. Furthermore the justices appointed in this partisan manner will shape America for several decades. Court rulings on key issues like abortion and medical marijuana will effect all of our lives within the next decade and even one partisan justice could be the one to turn the tide.

    [read less]

    Due to the nature of the Supreme Court I think that it has definitely become too partisan. Because the president nominates the new Supreme Court justi…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kylie from Texas

    It would be immature to assume those seated on the court do not have their own biases despite being in a position that should be unbiased. The Supreme Court should not be a place where party politics comes into play, yet, especially in the recent Kavanaugh confirmation, it is apparent it has in the manner in which both parties handled the issue. When people in the Supreme Court become more concerned with party than policy, it has become too partisan.

    [read less]

    It would be immature to assume those seated on the court do not have their own biases despite being in a position that should be unbiased. The Supreme…

    [read more]
    0
  • Erin from Virginia

    Yes, the Supreme Court has become too partisan because the justices are letting their political parties override their decision making. The original purpose of the Supreme Court (according to article three of the constitution) is to provide a neutral viewpoint on issues brought to them and decide what is best for the country. However, in the last few years the United States has begun to see a trend of Supreme Court justices voting in allignment with the political party they identify more closely with. This is why Republican presidents tend to nominate judges who have more conservative viewpoints, and vice versa for Democratic presidents to vote for judges leaning more liberal. By doing this, it defeats the purpose of having a neutral vote and instead of becoming a tie breaker, it risks becomes a biased political debate.

    [read less]

    Yes, the Supreme Court has become too partisan because the justices are letting their political parties override their decision making. The original p…

    [read more]
    0
  • Andrea from Virginia

    I believe the supreme court has become too partisan, based on recent votes. The supreme court is also know in the past of deciding rulings, such as Plessy vs Ferguson. Therefore I believe that the supreme court is not completing its job

    [read less]

    I believe the supreme court has become too partisan, based on recent votes. The supreme court is also know in the past of deciding rulings, such as Pl…

    [read more]
    0
  • Dowon from Virginia

    Federal judge Brett Kavanaugh’s ascension to the Supreme Court is practically guaranteed. Democrats have no power to stop it. As of likely the fifth vote to cement a right-wing Republican majority on the court, Kavanaugh is expected to ensure the elimination or fatal erosion of abortion rights, as well as a broad range of government health, welfare and safety regulations, regardless of their popular support. This simplifies that Kavanaugh has a major advantage with the help of the supreme court.

    [read less]

    Federal judge Brett Kavanaugh’s ascension to the Supreme Court is practically guaranteed. Democrats have no power to stop it. As of likely the fifth…

    [read more]
    0
  • Naomi from Virginia

    Recently, the Supreme Court has been proven to be partisan. By the Constitution, the Supreme Court Justices are supposed to determine whether laws are constitutional or unconstitutional along with their other laid out responsibilities. Now with the republicans and democrats growing further apart, it is .dividing our country into two sides: blue and red. As seen with the recent swearing in of Brett Kavanaugh into the Supreme Court, many senators voted by their political views, either democrat or republican and as Kavanaugh is known to be republican and nominated by a Republican president, many Republicans voted for him, and vice versa for the Democrats. Although Supreme Court Justices aren’t supposed to be partisan, this country is run by the political divide, and as the president has the power to nominate a candidate, it is usually someone who leans towards the political party of the president and has the same beliefs. The Supreme Court’s responsibilities and power include that they have to make a decision on cases based on the Constitution and previous historical cases, not their own political beliefs. In fact, Supreme Court Justices are not supposed to have a known affiliation with a specific party in order to make unbiased decisions in the court. However, in lew of the recent swearing in of Kavanaugh, his political views are very clear and clearly demonstrate the partisan present in the Supreme Court.

    [read less]

    Recently, the Supreme Court has been proven to be partisan. By the Constitution, the Supreme Court Justices are supposed to determine whether laws are…

    [read more]
    0
  • Nathaly from Virginia

    The Supreme Court was created to revise and make sure that all bills, laws, and actions taken by the government are constitutional. Yet, over time the people within the Supreme Court have forgotten the basis of what they’re job is and the fact that they are judging to see if everything is not crossing the Constitution guidelines. Now decisions are made all based off of bias. People within the court make decisions that could favor their party not mattering the crime or moral issue. A great example of this is the Kavanaugh-Ford hearing. Accused of sexual assault, Kavanaugh was still confirmed to the Supreme Court.Almost all of The republicans voted in favor for him, ignoring the fact that he was acuused of sexual assault, just because it would benefit their party. The supreme court has definitely become too partisan.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court was created to revise and make sure that all bills, laws, and actions taken by the government are constitutional. Yet, over time the…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kayla from Virginia

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan because I think that recent votes have mostly been based on the party a member of the Court belongs to instead of what is Constitutional. Most of the Republicans voted for Kavanaugh and most of the Democrats voted against him. I think that a lot of members of the court probably voted based on if they’re a Democrat or a Republican instead of what they really believed was Constitutional or not. The Supreme Court’s main job is to decide if laws or decisions are Constitutional or un-Constitutional. If members of the Supreme Court are voting based on if they’re a Democrat or a Republican instead of really deciding what is Constitutional then the Supreme Court is not doing the best it can to be fair.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan because I think that recent votes have mostly been based on the party a member of the Court belong…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jake from Virginia

    The supreme court was created as a check to the legislative branch. To decide whether the laws that were being made are constitutional or not. Today it has turned into a political mess. Whichever party controls the supreme court controls whether they will name laws constitutional or not. For example, if republicans control the supreme court, votes regarding laws that the republicans want passed will almost always be 5-4 and vice versa. The supreme court was created to decide whether or not laws that were being made are going against the freedoms given to us by the constitution. NOT created to be another political control point for the two different parties.

    [read less]

    The supreme court was created as a check to the legislative branch. To decide whether the laws that were being made are constitutional or not. Today i…

    [read more]
    0
  • DYLAN from Nebraska

    The Supreme Court needs to be neutral when hearing a case. This currently is not the case, a Supreme Court Justice should leave their personal and religious beliefs at their office door. They needs to hear each case of in merits, and not whether the issue is Republican or Democratic. Our four fathers would be so disappointed.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court needs to be neutral when hearing a case. This currently is not the case, a Supreme Court Justice should leave their personal and rel…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jagat from Arizona

    Supreme Court justices are appointed for life by Congress. As Congress gets more partisan, the Supreme Court nominations and confirmations will also be more partisan. The recent confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh confirms this. In 2017, the nuclear option was used in Congress to overturn the requirement that each Justice be confirmed with a supermajority vote. Brett Kavanaugh has benefitted from this. He was voted in as a Justice despite a questionable-at-best job interview because congresspeople voted along their party lines, and the Republicans (who sponsored him) currently have a Congressional majority. The requirement of a simple majority to vote in a Supreme Court justice will continue to make the Supreme Court more partisan, because the majority party now has no incentive to nominate a qualified judge who will appeal to the other side.

    [read less]

    Supreme Court justices are appointed for life by Congress. As Congress gets more partisan, the Supreme Court nominations and confirmations will also …

    [read more]
    0
  • Lila from Washington

    The Supreme Court are not voting for who is best for the position but who they believe will go along with the majority vote. Whichever party is the majority in the court system is who is going to win the most votes.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court are not voting for who is best for the position but who they believe will go along with the majority vote. Whichever party is the ma…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sania from Illinois

    Supreme Court Justices should represent the people, regardless of their party. It is fundamental that they do this because as court justices, they need to be neutral. Unfortunately, we have fallen into a divide that leads people to believe only what their party believes instead of thinking for themselves. Because of this, justices are only voting in favor of their party, rather that what is fair. I believe in order to escape this cycle, they must move away from identity through political party, and move toward genuine neutrality to better the American people as a whole.

    [read less]

    Supreme Court Justices should represent the people, regardless of their party. It is fundamental that they do this because as court justices, they nee…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ian from Virginia

    I believe that the supreme court has become too powerful and politically involved. Originally, the supreme court was meant to interpret the constitution and to serve as a check for the legislative and executive branches. However, it has now become a place to try to implement people who agree with your policies, and try to push those policies through.

    [read less]

    I believe that the supreme court has become too powerful and politically involved. Originally, the supreme court was meant to interpret the constituti…

    [read more]
    0
  • Alexandria from Ohio

    The Supreme court has become to partisan. For example during the Kavanaugh vs. Ford case Judge Kavanaugh blames one side for the court not the court as a whole. Also, in decisions most justices vote the way of their party instead of being open minded.

    [read less]

    The Supreme court has become to partisan. For example during the Kavanaugh vs. Ford case Judge Kavanaugh blames one side for the court not the court a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Eric from Virginia

    The purpose of the Supreme Court is to be the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all, the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s power is limited by the other two branches of government through checks and balances. The amount of power and influence the Supreme Court has on our people and government is huge and this should not be altered to meet a party’s selfish desires. Political parties play a huge role towards biased selection which leads to partisan within our government. The Supreme Court was established to maintain constitutionality and should remain this way without letting partisan practices get in the way.

    [read less]

    The purpose of the Supreme Court is to be the final judge in all cases involving laws of Congress, and the highest law of all, the Constitution. The S…

    [read more]
    0
  • Marco from California

    The purpose of the Supreme Court is to protect and maintain the constitutional bedrock of our nation’s laws. According to Article III of the Constitution, “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution…”. This is the judicial mandate according to the law of the land; the Justice’s of the Supreme Court are to rule on all bills, laws, agreements, disagreements, and treaties with the understanding that none of these may violate the U.S. Constitution. Sadly, many of our Justices on both sides of the aisle have done away with an originalist interpretation of the Constitution, and stooped to partisan decisions that affect the entire nation. There are far too many decisions made in the Supreme Court that are motivated by political leanings, rather than a dedication to the text of the Constitution.

    [read less]

    The purpose of the Supreme Court is to protect and maintain the constitutional bedrock of our nation’s laws. According to Article III of the Constitut…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jacob from Virginia

    The Supreme Court was founded through the Constitution on the idea that they would make decisions purely based off of whether the issue at hand is constitutional or not. However, our government was meant to evolve and adapt as time went on, but our government should still follow the initial idea that decisions should be made on whether the issue is constitutional or not. Currently, our government is too focused on what party our Supreme Court Justice Nominees represent rather than their individual capabilities and their background.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court was founded through the Constitution on the idea that they would make decisions purely based off of whether the issue at hand is con…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tunisia from Michigan

    The Supreme Court’s justice has become too paritisan because they rather vote for their party to sustain a spot in their position or to stay in that party. If they’ve voted based on their opinion and views is would contradict their party views, therefore: they would soon be voted out of their party. Also by speaking freely they could jeopardize their party’s justice, reputation, etc.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court’s justice has become too paritisan because they rather vote for their party to sustain a spot in their position or to stay in that p…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ace from Virginia

    Yes, I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. During the debate of whether judge Kavanaugh should be appoint as a Justice of the Supreme Court I noticed that the Supreme Court being partisan. As the Republican party voted in favor of Judge Kavanaugh a republican, the Democratic voted against him. I feel that the Senators who voted for or against the appointment of Judge Kavanaugh only voted in favor of their party instead of whether he was truly qualified for his position.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. During the debate of whether judge Kavanaugh should be appoint as a Justice of the Supr…

    [read more]
    0
  • Katherine from Virginia

    The Supreme Court should not vote on things solely based on the party that has placed them in the Supreme Court. The justices should do the best to vote based on what they believe to be the correct answer or verdict.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court should not vote on things solely based on the party that has placed them in the Supreme Court. The justices should do the best to vo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Noah from Virginia

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Partisan is a noun meaning a strong supporter of a person, party, or cause. As mentioned above, the recent swearing in of Judge Kavanaugh was a very controversial time for the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh was nominated by the President, was in the process of being questioned when multiple women testified against him with accusations that he had sexually assaulted them. However, even after the trial, Kavanaugh still was sworn into the Supreme Court as a Justice. This is to show that even if most people are against a vote, the candidate. The Judicial Branch was defined by the Constitution as a interpreter of laws. This means that whatever comes through the Judicial Branch, it has to be in lines with the Constitution. I feel that even though most of the Supreme Court Justices voted against Kavanaugh, he still was elected. The Supreme Court has allowed this to happen since there are a lot of Republicans on the board.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Partisan is a noun meaning a strong supporter of a person, party, or cause. As mentioned abo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Grace from Virginia

    I believe the Supreme Court is very partisan. When electing someone to serve on the supreme court I feel like it has become more about who has the same beliefs as the president and the party in power. I think when being elected to the Supreme Court it should be based on how well you can do your job and interpret the constitution, not what you believe in and what party you associate with. Even though the Supreme Court is suppose to rule if it is constitutional or not most times the ruling is based on ones beliefs and what party they associate with. Many social issues in this country are based on court rulings, for example, LQBTQ rights, racial issues and woman’s rights, this gives a lot of power to the courts and gives them the power to rule based on their party views.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court is very partisan. When electing someone to serve on the supreme court I feel like it has become more about who has the sam…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sorie from Virginia

    In the Supreme Court, partisanship is not unusual when it comes to appointments. The Senate has to use time to evaluate judges to make sure they are fit for this important role in our government. Although some people may have things that they have done in the past or may not have too much knowledge, we see that senators constantly lean towards that candidate that is in their party because they do not feel like there is any other person who can do that job. This is where we wonder about Kavanaugh’s confirmation, because with all the things that he has been accused about, it questions the belief of what out Founding Fathers set up the country to be, because we do not know if he will have good morals and constitutionality when handling big cases and laws. If the Senate chooses someone that has experience without any bad complications, regardless of the party, then there should not any controversial issues happening in the news today.

    [read less]

    In the Supreme Court, partisanship is not unusual when it comes to appointments. The Senate has to use time to evaluate judges to make sure they are f…

    [read more]
    0
  • Lara from Virginia

    I think the supreme court has become too Partisan. Kavanaugh has been accused of sexual assault multiple times. If this happened to a “normal” man, then we would be punished. The Republicans voted for Kavanaugh, because he is republican. The Republicans just wanted to have a republican to become a justice.

    [read less]

    I think the supreme court has become too Partisan. Kavanaugh has been accused of sexual assault multiple times. If this happened to a “normal” man…

    [read more]
    0
  • Bethany from Kentucky

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. As seen by the selection of Brett Kavanaugh, justices are primarily chosen along party lines. In the grand scheme of things, the importance of the rape allegations against him was significantly diminished, mostly by republicans. President Trump and conservative congressmen and women wanted a republican majority in the Supreme Court and proved that they would go to extreme lengths to get it. In addition, Supreme Court justices are not necessarily voting to reflect the constitution or the will of the people. They are voting along party lines, reinforcing the emphasis placed on having a majority in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court and its justices should make unbiased decisions based on justice, the framework of the constitution, and the will of the people; leaving their party and their personal political beliefs out of it.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. As seen by the selection of Brett Kavanaugh, justices are primarily chosen along party lines…

    [read more]
    0
  • Adriel from Virginia

    The Supreme Court is becoming increasingly partisan and has been for many decades. Often, people in the Senate just vote for the Supreme Court justice that is affiliated with their party. This is a major problem, especially considering the fact that Supreme Court justices are supposed to be neutral. Without neutral justices, how can we expect them to make fair decisions? They may end up making decisions that favor their party. This will disrupt the concept of checks and balances, since it relies on the idea that the three branches of government will not conspire.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court is becoming increasingly partisan and has been for many decades. Often, people in the Senate just vote for the Supreme Court justice…

    [read more]
    0
  • Madison from Virginia

    In US history, the Supreme Court has been partisan. For example Adams attempted to stack the court with his “midnight judges” of federalist minded appointees before Jefferson came into office. The president holds the delegated power that reserves their right to appoint judges and justices(which are later approved by the senate). In all likelihood, the president will most likely select appointees of the same party with similar opinions and beliefs. This in itself creates partisan within the courts. Although this has been a longstanding issue, it does not always make it okay. When political parties gets in the way of the efficiency of the Supreme court it can be a problem. The court is focusing more on what political party individuals belong to than the common good of the country.

    [read less]

    In US history, the Supreme Court has been partisan. For example Adams attempted to stack the court with his “midnight judges” of federalist minded app…

    [read more]
    0
  • Arleny from New Jersey

    We should be able to feel comfortable not only with people with power but people in general. By showing that there are no repercussions we are not only showing that it’s okay to take advantage of a woman’s body but that you’ll be awarded if you do so.

    [read less]

    We should be able to feel comfortable not only with people with power but people in general. By showing that there are no repercussions we are not onl…

    [read more]
    0
  • Shyanne from Virginia

    The Supreme Court becoming more partisan is a dangerous reality. When political parties come into play, people are more encouraged to vote for their own party regardless of the actual candidate. This group-think mentality turns the selection process into a game that is to be “won” by a political “team” when this was not what was intended for the Supreme Court. Instead of justices being selected based on knowledge and experience, they are being selected for their party. This causes the actual issues at hand to be trivialized in favor of this “sports match”. One can certainly argue that it is impossible to avoid this kind of behavior, but that does not mean that it should be provoked or encouraged. Leave the messy politics for the other branches and keep the Supreme Court the way it’s supposed to be- neutral.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court becoming more partisan is a dangerous reality. When political parties come into play, people are more encouraged to vote for their o…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kelsey from North Carolina

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan. Supreme Court Justices are increasingly voting more strictly to their party. Their focus has shifted to the political parties and their roles rather than having the focus on solving the issues at hand constitutionally. A clear line has been drawn between the views of the political parties and most supreme court justices stay on their side. They do what their party wants rather than look at what the constitution says they should do. Supreme Court Justices are supposed to make decisions based on the constitution and not be biased by parties, but this is not currently happening.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan. Supreme Court Justices are increasingly voting more strictly to their party. Their focus has shifted to the…

    [read more]
    0
  • Tiana from California

    In a general statement, the Supreme Court and politics as a whole has become partisan to monetary gain. These rulings will affect the way we live based on what companies are buying into office. It is up to the people to see people as their are and not as they are affiliated. We the people must hold those in office accountable. We must demand that the people we elect into office uphold their end of the deal.

    [read less]

    In a general statement, the Supreme Court and politics as a whole has become partisan to monetary gain. These rulings will affect the way we live base…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kisha from Nebraska

    The supreme Court Justices have lifetime tenure. They should be able to put party lines aside to decide whether or not something is right by the constitution. I believe the Supreme court has no right tto use political affiliation to either admit or oppose someone from te Supreme Court. Morals, values and beliefs are more important than party lines.

    [read less]

    The supreme Court Justices have lifetime tenure. They should be able to put party lines aside to decide whether or not something is right by the const…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ashton from Texas

    The Supreme Court has stood on the foundation that parties should not affect a decision. The different perspective the Supreme Court typically had involved looking past a candidate’s party to the knowledge and beliefs they themselves hold. A party cannot always define an individual’s political standings. Partisanship may happen in some cases, but it certainly should not become the justices ultimate deciding factor. Reducing the partisanship will align more to the core beliefs the Founding Fathers placed during the writing of the Constitution. Our system cannot afford to please a party at the expense of the values they are to be true to.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has stood on the foundation that parties should not affect a decision. The different perspective the Supreme Court typically had inv…

    [read more]
    0
  • Eddy from Virginia

    I do believe that the Supreme Court has become more partisan over the years. When judicial review was implemented into the Supreme Court system, its main purpose was to help decide if laws were unconstitutional or not. There was nothing stated about judicial review being party dependent and or have anything involved with politics. Currently, votes and nominations are more based on each party’s views rather than own personal beliefs and opinions which is why I think the U.S Supreme Court and Judicial Branch overall has inherited a partisan characteristic.

    [read less]

    I do believe that the Supreme Court has become more partisan over the years. When judicial review was implemented into the Supreme Court system, its m…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brendan from Virginia

    I feel that the Supreme Court has not become too partisan, although I also think that it hasn’t become any more partisan than it has been for the last thirty years. Of course, just as the nominated justices will have their own political bias, so will those overseeing the confirmation process. However, that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a limit to how partisan the process can be. Nominated justices are to be questioned by the Senate Judiciary committee to determine if they are qualified for the position, not necessarily to determine every singe political stance that they may take so to perhaps catch them off guard in accidentally saying something that disqualifies them. Reducing partisanism in the justice confirmation process supports the idea of not confirming a Justice who has an overpowering prejudice before hearing any case.

    On the other hand, just as Justices have bias on given topics, political or not, those overseeing the confirmation process will have their own bias as it is their job as elected officials of the senate to represent their citizens. If the people do not like the nominated official, then it would be their senator’s duty to be their voice and oppose the confirmation. Since the process of choosing a justice is left relatively unspecified in the constitution, there really is not a boundary as far as partisanism goes. Then again, what can resisting the confirmation do if the person is well qualified and meets all standards but has a differing opinion from a Senator’s? Is the Senate allowed to reject a justice because of something that is perhaps as small as that?

    For one thing, I understand that one would not want a heartless, blood-thirsty psychopath in the position of a justice. I also understand that as a senator with an opposing view from a Supreme court justice nominee, one may not like the idea of passing a nominee who comes from the opposing party. However, that is not the situation to deal with in that time. If the nomination has already been made and if the nominee is qualified based on their responses to the Senate judiciary committee, then the Senate should spare them resistance and themselves resist partisan. Furthermore, in order to expand on a previous point, I think the senate should make their judgement based on the quality of the nominee’s political opinions and whether they are of reasonable value that will rationally and constitutionally do justice; an examination from a non-biased point of view.

    Overall, I think that partisan from the Senate is, to an extent, acceptable but currently exceeds what is appropriate and is not necessary, if not futile in the first place. I also believe that there is a need for laws to clarify the powers of all parties involved in the confirmation process, though I acknowledge a difficulty in doing so without adding a greater complexity to the system.

    [read less]

    I feel that the Supreme Court has not become too partisan, although I also think that it hasn’t become any more partisan than it has been for the last…

    [read more]
    0
    • Brendan from Virginia

      ***sorry, I meant to say that the court HAS become too partisan in the first sentence.***

      0
  • Ethan from Pennsylvania

    In the Marbury v. Madison case of 1803, the Supreme Court assumed the role of determining the constitutionality of legislation the president signed into law. Since that day, it has had the task of defending the people’s fundamental human rights from the other branches by judicial review. Few object to this power, though it was a large leap from its original powers.
    Over the next hundred years, the Supreme Court became an unelected oligarchy controlling what is and isn’t constitutional not based on the Constitution, but rather based on the Justices’ personal opinions on what the Constitution should say. The Dred Scott decision gave the court the power to determine who was and wasn’t a citizen, and by extension who was and wasn’t legally human. Again in Roe v. Wade, the court determined who is and isn’t entitled to their fundamental, God-given human rights. In Obergefell v. Hodges, the court single-handedly made the millennia-old traditions of marriage and family nothing more than a matter of mutual sexual attraction. That decision paved the way for harassment and lawsuits against business owners and even churches who refuse to violate their religion by aiding in the marriage. In Wickard v. Filburn, the court decided that the government could control what food a farmer could grow on his own farm for his own use since it could potentially interfere with commerce. In Kelo v. New London, the court decided that private property could be seized at a whim. In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, the court compelled citizens to buy healthcare against their will, and fined them if they refused.
    It has become so powerful that it has no alternative but to be politicized. Absolute power corrupts absolutely, and we have nine people in our government who can take away the freedom of association, private property, and even the right to continue to exist by merely voting “aye” or “nay.” To believe they would be so virtuous that they wouldn’t abuse that power is beyond naive. The Supreme Court is politicized because whoever controls the court controls America, and whoever controls America controls the world.

    [read less]

    In the Marbury v. Madison case of 1803, the Supreme Court assumed the role of determining the constitutionality of legislation the president signed in…

    [read more]
    0
  • James from Virginia

    Yes, I think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Without a doubt, the nomination and voting process for Brett Kavanaugh to be the new justice on the Supreme Court has been surrounded in lots of controversy. With allegations of sexual harassment from Kavanaugh in his youth, it seems clear to me that there would be no way that Kavanaugh would have been sworn in. With any other occupation or person, an accusation like that could land you with time in jail and would definitely not get you hired in any positions. I believe that the biggest reason why Kavanaugh was still sworn in despite this was because of partisanship. On the republican side, it is too important for them to have a republican justice to have interpretations of the law go in favor of them. I believe that this is something that has to change because it is getting to that point where the candidate nominated may not even be qualified to hold such a powerful position yet is still elected because a political party wants to ensure that they can have the long term advantage over the other.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Without a doubt, the nomination and voting process for Brett Kavanaugh to be the new just…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sadie from Wyoming

    The supreme court no longer makes votes based on facts and their ways of belief. As they vote they vote to only support the ideals of their political party to gain favor. Partisanship has been and will always be a part of the court, but there is a level we reach where we are no longer voting for our beliefs of right or wrong as a whole. That level is where we are at now.

    [read less]

    The supreme court no longer makes votes based on facts and their ways of belief. As they vote they vote to only support the ideals of their political …

    [read more]
    0
  • Siman from Virginia

    The supreme court has become too partisan. Many years ago the Senate would confirm whatever candidate the President appointed to the court as long as they had experience. When the supreme Court gained power, the process for selecting justices became more partisan. Senators now like to vote depending on the parties of the candidate. When the founding fathers wrote the constitution they did not foresee the supreme court being so powerful and political. The supreme court should be run how the founding fathers envisioned it, based off of merit rather than party.

    [read less]

    The supreme court has become too partisan. Many years ago the Senate would confirm whatever candidate the President appointed to the court as long as…

    [read more]
    0
  • Chandler from Tennessee

    The judges should not be partisan. The intent of the Supreme Court was for it to be non-partisan and to rule, accordingly.

    0
  • Laura from Washington

    The Republican party has made the Supreme Court a Partisan organization. Until recently, Presidents nominated judges, and they were usually accepted by both parties. If a Republican president nominated a judge they were usually more conservative, and if a Democratic President nominated a judge they were usually a bit more liberal. Lately the Republicans have pushed for their own party on the Supreme Court. Mitch McConnell held up Obama’s nominee Merrick Garland for over a year until a republican was in the office of president. Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination was “plowed through” by the republicans without proper vetting or time spent investigating his multiple crimes of lying under oath, even after his highly partisan angry rant in front of congress. The Republicans have decided that “party over everything” including the highest court of the land is their strategy. Justice, honesty, the rule of law, and separation of the branches of government is now dead.

    [read less]

    The Republican party has made the Supreme Court a Partisan organization. Until recently, Presidents nominated judges, and they were usually accepted b…

    [read more]
    0
  • anna from Alabama

    I do think that the Supreme Court has most recently became partisan. When Trump took office in 2017, The most Supreme Court seats were taken by Republicans. Since the majority of the seats are being taken by specifically one party they are being very partisan. The Supreme Court has vote toward the Republicans more than the Demarcates or the Independents.

    [read less]

    I do think that the Supreme Court has most recently became partisan. When Trump took office in 2017, The most Supreme Court seats were taken by Republ…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kevin from Virginia

    Before I answer this question lets reflect on all the justices 1986-2018 and the votes for or against them.
    1986 – Antonio Scalia: 98 for – 0 against
    1988 – Anthony Kennedy: 97-0
    1988 – David Souter: 90-9
    1991 – Clarence Thomas: 52-48
    1993 – Ruth B. Ginsburg: 96-3
    1994 – Stephen G. Breyer: 87-9
    2006 – Samuel Anthony Alito Jr.: 58-42
    2009 – Sonia Sotomayer: 68-31
    2009 – Elena Kagan: 63-37
    2017 – Neil Gorsuch: 54-45
    2019 – Brett Kavanaugh: 50-48

    source: https://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/reference/nominations/Nominations.htm

    Since 1994 we can see that the confirmation process for Justices has certainly become more partisan, that follows the trend that America’s seen post 9/11. Which is that there is an increasing division along party lines, not only among people in Congress but among the American public as well.
    However, I believe this question asks about the Supreme Court Itself becoming too partisan, which I think is true. In recent times, Presidents have increasingly picked nominees they think share similar viewpoints or political stances as themselves or the party they associate with, and that reflects with the data above. By picking judges based on politics we undermine their sole job of being an open and unbiased judge. This effectively gives judges a reason to judge with an agenda so their party constituents will continue to support them. The problem with a judge with an agenda is they will rule on cases in accordance to the party they’ve aligned themselves with, many cases they could already have decided on the case, before hearing the whole case.
    If we want the supreme court to be less partisan the president should either nominate a judge who will judge based on what is presented to them and form an opinion after they hear the case, or the senate committee needs to worry less about who the nominee aligns with, and focus more on if the nominee will be a fair judge, and a good judge.

    [read less]

    Before I answer this question lets reflect on all the justices 1986-2018 and the votes for or against them.
    1986 – Antonio Scalia: 98 for – 0 against…

    [read more]
    0
  • Amanda from Virginia

    While this question pertains only to the Supreme Court, I believe that any process of electing or appointing someone to a government position has become increasingly more about political party affiliation as the years go on. More and more it seems that people will vote with their preferred political party, rather than with the actual ideas of an individual. I think this was particularly present in the 2016 election, where either side of the political spectrum felt obligated to stay loyal with their party. Voting for someone should never be about where your political beliefs lie, it should be about agreeing with the person and their ideas, as well as intent with said position of power. With the hard instillment of political parties in American government, members of the Supreme Court are eager to keep the numbers of their political party up. When it comes down to it, it is about the which party has the most seats in order to keep votes on their side of the spectrum.

    [read less]

    While this question pertains only to the Supreme Court, I believe that any process of electing or appointing someone to a government position has beco…

    [read more]
    0
  • Noa from Virginia

    The Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. As a republican president, and a right leaning senate, the appointments are likely to be on that side of the spectrum. For example, when previous Pres. Obama appointed Merrick Garland for the supreme court, and Obama being a democrat against a republican senate, his nomination was not confirmed. Also, a reason for Kavanaugh being confirmed is the senate has a republican majority. Also if the majority of justices on the Supreme Court are republican, the decisions made my the court will contain those bias.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court justices are appointed by the president and confirmed by the senate. As a republican president, and a right leaning senate, the appo…

    [read more]
    0
    • Jasmine from Maryland

      Pres. Obama’s candidate wasnt even afforded the opportunity to be confirmed or denied through the proper confirmation process. Republicans were selfish enough to cloud the process with their own agendas. Hence how we ended up with Kavanaugh, though there was at least one Democrat that sided with Republicans. It is indeed, not the court itself, but the Republican party’s wish to undo everything that Pres. Obama previously did (whether right or wrong) that has made the Supreme Court less partisan than what it has previously been. I also believe Justices come to the court with their own preconceived notions and biases that are separate from that relative to the party. They may just be further swayed by individuals within their respective party that holds those same beliefs. Unfortunately, those beliefs play into how court cases are decided and that is not always what’s in the best interest of this country.

      [read less]

      Pres. Obama’s candidate wasnt even afforded the opportunity to be confirmed or denied through the proper confirmation process. Republicans were selfis…

      [read more]
      0
  • Jennifer from Illinois

    The US Supreme Court has absolutely become too partisan in recent years. At times, most recently in the 20th century, a justice’s interpretation of the law was not necessarily based in the political philosophy of the president who appointed him or her, and sometimes that interpretation evolved over the years. For example, Justice John Paul Stevens, who was appointed by President Gerald Ford, turned out to be one of the more liberal justices on the Court. Similarly, Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was appointed by President Ronald Reagan, became the expected swing vote in many landmark cases during his tenure. The two most recent appointments to the Court, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, have extreme right-wing political beliefs. The Court now has a solid 5-4 conservative majority, and I am concerned that if President Trump is permitted a third appointment during his term, the Court will be undeniably conservative for the foreseeable future. This would be detrimental to US citizens, who deserve a US Supreme Court that is unbiased politically. I fear for the future of this nation. We have fallen so far from the Warren Court of the ’60s and ’70s.

    [read less]

    The US Supreme Court has absolutely become too partisan in recent years. At times, most recently in the 20th century, a justice’s interpretation of th…

    [read more]
    0
  • Annie from New York

    The supreme court nominees have always been confirmed along party lines. With the allegations against Brett Kavanaugh surfacing, it has become evident that the Supreme Court has become too partisan. The supreme is the highest appealing court in America. That is a fact. What is not a fact is that these judges will always vote with moral conscious. Judges are suppose to vote for the benefit of the people as a whole, not in support of one part or another. This has become the case with the exception of Judge Kennedy. Most judges will vote in favor of whatever party that they stand behind with the pressure that comes with the party. Because this is a lifetime job that will last through a number of decades and generation, America needs to be much more careful as to who they let in the supreme court. While it is okay for everyday people to have a preference. It is not okay for a judge to due to the fact that they could be the determining vote, and they have to keep in consideration the entire country, not just half. Especially with cases that are much more sensitive.

    [read less]

    The supreme court nominees have always been confirmed along party lines. With the allegations against Brett Kavanaugh surfacing, it has become evident…

    [read more]
    0
  • Freya from Virginia

    I believe that the supreme court has become too partisan. The most recent example of a strong sense of partisanship is with new justice Brett Kavanaugh, who tends to side with more conservative views. Live streams of the recent hearings, that can be found on the USA today website among others, have shown this partisanship in action. The way the different parties members interacted with Kavanaugh showed partisanship. Republican Congressman John Cornyn acted in a friendly manner while questioning Kavanaugh during the hearings. Both were seen smiling while interacting with each other. Democratic Congressman Cory Booker was more cut and dry with Kavanaugh. He wanted straight forward answers and didn’t want to spend time having fun or conversing and even talked in a more demanding tone than Cornyn. The difference in the ways the parties acted toward Kavanaugh shows partisanship and who which party would rather have on the court. The partisanship is also evident in the fact that the Republicans control the senate with more people right now and Kavanaugh, again more conservative leaning, got the confirmation.

    [read less]

    I believe that the supreme court has become too partisan. The most recent example of a strong sense of partisanship is with new justice Brett Kavanaug…

    [read more]
    0
  • Evan from Virginia

    I believe that recently the supreme court has become too partisan. Electing people to the supreme court has become more about picking someone that is in the same party as you instead of someone who could fairly interpret the constitution. The most recent conformation hearing lead to one of the closest votes in history, a 50-48 split with almost no one crossing party lines.

    [read less]

    I believe that recently the supreme court has become too partisan. Electing people to the supreme court has become more about picking someone that is …

    [read more]
    0
  • Caroline from Oregon

    As is stated above, the supreme court was not intended to be a very powerful branch of government. In recent years, however, the supreme court has become a powerful method for the left to push their agenda without submitting their policy to a vote. With issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage, policy of the left has become law not through legislation, but through court rulings. Because the Supreme Court is so important to the left, the left feels the need to resort to increasingly partisan methods to keep the Court a policymaker and restrict the number of judges on the court that will give rulings based on the constitution instead of based of UN documents or other sources. As long as the Supreme Court is seen as a way to pass policy by the left, it will remain partisan.

    [read less]

    As is stated above, the supreme court was not intended to be a very powerful branch of government. In recent years, however, the supreme court has bec…

    [read more]
    0
  • Asia from Georgia

    People are clouded by their own belief systems instead of having a neutral standpoint.

    0
  • Connor from Virginia

    I don’t feel like the Supreme Court is just now becoming partisan, but has always been partisan for the past decades. Past Supreme Court cases have proved each justice has voted the way towards the way their party views an issue. This has made it easy to predict how each justice will vote because their vote will always be based off their parties’ beliefs with the exception of Anthony Kennedy. He is the only justice considered a “swing vote” on the Supreme Court, making it hard to predict which way he will vote. But by having the Supreme Court be partisan, it will cause a struggle of power between political parties to put more judges on the Supreme Court that side with their political views. This is why there needs to be a change within the Supreme Court and have more judges that have more moderate points of view politically so they will act more neutral and not based off a certain political party.

    [read less]

    I don’t feel like the Supreme Court is just now becoming partisan, but has always been partisan for the past decades. Past Supreme Court cases have pr…

    [read more]
    0
  • Kennedy from Virginia

    I think the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Back when the Constitution was first created, the Supreme Court was the weakest of the three branches and thus also the least partisan. It has become more partisan in recent years along with everything else. Senate and presidential elections have become partisan. To support this increasing partisanship, according to PBS’s article, “Is the hyper-partisan Supreme Court confirmation process ‘the new normal’?”, confirmation of Supreme Court nominees was unanimous. For example, the article states, “John Paul Stevens was confirmed 98-0 in 1975, and Sandra Day O’Connor joined the bench on a 99-0 vote in 1981. Retired Justices Anthony Kennedy — whom Kavanaugh would replace — and David Souter both received 90 or more votes.” This shows that back then (just 40 years ago) there was not so much disagreement. The recent confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh reached a 50-48 vote. This confirms such suspicion that the court has become partisan based on the parties surrounding it.

    [read less]

    I think the Supreme Court has become too partisan. Back when the Constitution was first created, the Supreme Court was the weakest of the three branch…

    [read more]
    0
  • James from Alabama

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan because of the Republican party, that has consistently circumvented democratic procedural measures in place to ensure a fair and impartial court, in favour of a far-right court, that is dangerous to LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, labour rights, human rights, racial justice, social justice, and economic justice.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan because of the Republican party, that has consistently circumvented democratic procedural measures in place …

    [read more]
    0
  • Paige from Virginia

    The Supreme Court has become too focused on what party did what. If a Republican president nominates someone, the Democrats automatically say no, and vice versa. Recently, votes haven’t been seen as what is constitutional, instead they’re seen as “My party believes this, so this is what we’re doing.” That isn’t the function of the court. The court is supposed to determine if laws are constitutional or not, there shouldn’t be any talk of political party. Marbury versus Madison established judicial review and there was no discussion of if it would be dependent on party, so why should it be any different today?

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too focused on what party did what. If a Republican president nominates someone, the Democrats automatically say no, and …

    [read more]
    0
  • Samantha from Virginia

    the GOP has been throwing a super partisan hissy fit since President Obama was elected & reelected…
    now that they have control of all three branches they’re going to keep up their corrupt tricks and cheating for their own benefit & the interests of billionaires & their corporate overlords

    [read less]

    the GOP has been throwing a super partisan hissy fit since President Obama was elected & reelected…
    now that they have control of all three bra…

    [read more]
    0
  • Benjamin from Virginia

    The Supreme Court has become too divided on party lines. In 2016, the Republican Senate leaders refused to even vote on the confirmation of nominee Merrick Garland, citing the fact that it was the last year of former President Barack Obama’s term. This was criticized by the Senate Democrats, who claimed it was unprecedented. The party divisions are even clearer in Kavanaugh’s confirmation: every Republican present except Murkowski voted to confirm him, and every Democrat except Manchin voted to reject him. Such a distinct trend in voting proves the influence of parties in the Supreme Court. This is incredibly dangerous, because the heads of the judicial branch should be acting and voting with bipartisan neutrality in order to best move America forward, not draw a line in the sand between two opposing groups.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too divided on party lines. In 2016, the Republican Senate leaders refused to even vote on the confirmation of nominee Me…

    [read more]
    0
  • Chris from Massachusetts

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan is accurate, but it has been like that for the past 15 . The court justices do not vote what they truly feel but what they feel obligated to vote for whether its their party or people around them influencing. They pledge their allegiance to a party and disregard all morals surrounding certain questions and vote based on their influencers.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan is accurate, but it has been like that for the past 15 . The court justices do not vote what they truly fe…

    [read more]
    0
  • Shannon from Massachusetts

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan. The people on the Supreme Court have very important decisions to make. In order for these decisions to be as accurate as possible, there needs to be more diversity within them.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has become too partisan. The people on the Supreme Court have very important decisions to make. In order for these decisions to be a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Taher from Virginia

    Yes, I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan over time. When the the U.S. Constitution was first written, the Supreme Court was the weakest of the three branches at the time. As time progressed, the Supreme Court became increasingly powerful and now, the Supreme Court undoubtedly possesses the power of partisan. According to The Atlantic news, “From 1801 to 1940, less than 2 percent of the Supreme Court’s total rulings were resolved by 5-to-4 decisions. Since then, more than 16 percent of the Court’s rulings have been decided by ‘minimum-winning coalitions.’ ” In addition, “The most significant laws are increasingly decided by the same one-vote margin that undermines the very ‘supreme’ authority of the Court. The 1966 Miranda decision, which defined police suspects’ rights, was an early signal that 5-to-4 rulings were going to shape this nation like never before. The 2000 Bush v. Gore was decided along the same narrow margin.” I feel that the supreme court is voting on decisions based on whichever party has a majority and what one party is saying. This makes it unfair for the other party since there is a difference in the amount of members for the Democrats and the Republicans. This will eventually lead to one party running everything, leading to even more problems. Instead of compromising and working together, everyone argues which prevents the ability to compromise therefore nothing can get done.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan over time. When the the U.S. Constitution was first written, the Supreme Court was the w…

    [read more]
    0
  • Daniel from Georgia

    When the Founding Fathers formed the Supreme Court, along with the rest of the government, they never intended for the nation to adapt partisan politics. They wanted the Supreme Court especially to be impartial and just in its rulings, basing their decisions only on if a law was constitutional or not. But I feel that the Supreme Court has begun to stray from that purpose, with justices basing decisions more on their political parties than whether a law is constitutional. Congress also started appointing judges based on their political beliefs, as seen in the Republicans’ recent decision to place Brett Kavanaugh, a well-known conservative, to the court, and the refusal of the Republican Senate to confirm President Barack Obama’s last Supreme Court pick. The effects of this partisanship is prominently displayed in the media, with the most obvious being the public spectacles that court confirmation hearings have become, with Democrats and Republicans essentially shouting at each other throughout the proceedings. Partisanship has also began to appear in the court’s rulings, with it siding with Republicans in a recent gerrymandering case.

    [read less]

    When the Founding Fathers formed the Supreme Court, along with the rest of the government, they never intended for the nation to adapt partisan politi…

    [read more]
    0
  • joseph from Kentucky

    I think the Supreme Court is becoming Partisan, but so much in a bad way. For example, the Supreme Court made the right decision to confirm Kavanaugh to the Judge of the Supreme Court. I also think we should be careful with democrats in the Supreme Court because they provide very little evidence of what they’re trying to accomplish.

    [read less]

    I think the Supreme Court is becoming Partisan, but so much in a bad way. For example, the Supreme Court made the right decision to confirm Kavanaugh …

    [read more]
    0
  • Bella from Kentucky

    Yes I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because Democrats and Republicans have become too separated. I feel that Democrats and Republicans NEED to work together. Because if we, as Americans, don’t get along and don’t work together, our nation will never grow stronger and will stay the same. We need new ideas in our country, but if we keep fighting against each other, we will get nowhere.

    [read less]

    Yes I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because Democrats and Republicans have become too separated. I feel that Democrats and Re…

    [read more]
    0
  • zach from Kentucky

    yes, i do think the supreme court has become to partisan because our nation is not one anymore, its two separate sides, the Republicans and Democrats. Even though each side has different views on certain things, that doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t listen to the other side. Everyone has their own view on certain issues. Even though someone may think something, they should still listen to what the other side has to say because they have a different point of view on the subject. You have to take what the other side says into consideration when you make your decision.

    [read less]

    yes, i do think the supreme court has become to partisan because our nation is not one anymore, its two separate sides, the Republicans and Democrats….

    [read more]
    0
  • Jack from Kentucky

    Yes, I believe that it has become increasingly partisan because of the split between the democrats and the republicans. For example the Kavanaugh hearings were based solely on who was democrat and who was republican. It is very biased nowadays because of this massive split between the two parties.

    [read less]

    Yes, I believe that it has become increasingly partisan because of the split between the democrats and the republicans. For example the Kavanaugh hear…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brooke from Kentucky

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan because recent votes have been based on whatever party a member of the Court belongs to, rather than what is Constitutional. For example, almost all Republicans in the Supreme Court voted for Brett Kavanaugh to become a Supreme Court Justice while almost all Democrats voted against him. I feel that many members of the court probably voted based on their party rather than what they truly believed was Constitutional or not. The main function of the Supreme Court is to determine laws or decisions to be Constitutional or un-Constitutional. If members are voting based on the party they belong to rather than by a true evaluation of what is truly Constitutional, then the Supreme Court is not performing its job effectively.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court has become too partisan because recent votes have been based on whatever party a member of the Court belongs to, rather th…

    [read more]
    0
    • Jose from Florida

      Firstly, the Supreme Court has no vote in whether Justice Kavanaugh sits on the court. Secondly, Justices are (supposedly) non-partisan entities which means they do not express preference for any of the parties or policies; as said before their only job is to determine based on the Constitution and certain precedents if laws, executive orders and other important cases are, or not, consistent with these. The Court justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress thus they mirror American’s votes and decisions, though this does not mean the party in power gets to use the court as a political ace (as it has been tried before). Short and simple, the court has nothing to do with Kavanaugh’s nomination to it, President appoints, Congress confirms. Until the new court decides any case it is not valid to say if the court has lacks partisanship or not.

      [read less]

      Firstly, the Supreme Court has no vote in whether Justice Kavanaugh sits on the court. Secondly, Justices are (supposedly) non-partisan entities which…

      [read more]
      0
  • Alex from Kentucky

    The Supreme Court normally will go with whoever has the better debate. If a Democrat tries to make a law or something almost all the Republicans will vote against it just because they can. And If a Republican tries to make a law the Democrats will vote against it. The parties and Supreme Court will normally lean towards the party that has the most members at the time. Right now, Republicans have a little bit bigger lead in the house but with the November elections, they make switch to the Democrats.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court normally will go with whoever has the better debate. If a Democrat tries to make a law or something almost all the Republicans will …

    [read more]
    0
  • Abby from Kentucky

    I believe that the supreme court has become too partisan. I believe that the supreme court can be very biased, but not all of the time. The supreme court will always be partisan in some ways and we can’t control that, but I believe that they need to work on issues based off of what is best for the people

    [read less]

    I believe that the supreme court has become too partisan. I believe that the supreme court can be very biased, but not all of the time. The supreme co…

    [read more]
    0
  • Emma from Kentucky

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become to partisan and Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process has brought to light, a very important issue. The Supreme Court has become too partisan and this hinders the ability to compromise in our government. If this continues, pretty soon there will only be one party running everything. America needs compromise in order to work efficiently. Everyone needs to have their voices heard and if one party is running everything, there will be a lot of people that are not heard. The citizens of America need to be able to have a say in the government and have the peace to know that they are being heard.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become to partisan and Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation process has brought to light, a very importan…

    [read more]
    0
  • Olivia from Kentucky

    Yes, I think that the Supreme court is becoming too partisan because the Supreme court is becoming party dominated. The Supreme court is voting on decisions based on what one party is saying. The Democrats vote no on issues Republicans want, and the Republicans vote no on issues Democrats want. This is unfair since there is a slightly uneven amount of democrats and Republicans in the Supreme court. Kavanaugh’s processing is a very strong support to this theory because all the women came forward about being sexually assaulted, and yet he was still voted into the office because everyone is voting for there party instead of voting for things that are right.

    [read less]

    Yes, I think that the Supreme court is becoming too partisan because the Supreme court is becoming party dominated. The Supreme court is voting on dec…

    [read more]
    0
  • Rachel from Kentucky

    Yes, because even though we realize it or not, our government is becoming too partisan. There has always been problems with this and there probably always will be because people always take their own strong opinion into consideration. The United States does show that they are partisan, however, it is hard to remove this from any country. Although people argue that republicans do this now, but if there were more democrats in our government today then they would do the same thing.

    [read less]

    Yes, because even though we realize it or not, our government is becoming too partisan. There has always been problems with this and there probably al…

    [read more]
    0
  • Genna from Kentucky

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become split. Democrats and Republicans have differing views, however, I feel that the goal of the Supreme Court has shifted. Instead of trying to compromise and balance their beliefs, I feel that the two parties now go against each other. The goal is no longer compromise, the goal is that Democrats intentionally go against Republicans views and Republicans go against Democratic views.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become split. Democrats and Republicans have differing views, however, I feel that the goal of the Supreme Court …

    [read more]
    0
  • Josh from Kentucky

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because there is too much divide. There are so many constitutionalists within office right now that the party is dominated by the ideals of a single party. The support stands within the bounds of one vision of American future; a constitutionalist future. There should be more representation of the people within the Supreme Court and it should reflect the ideals and morals of the popular vote.

    [read less]

    I believe that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because there is too much divide. There are so many constitutionalists within office right no…

    [read more]
    0
  • Laila from California

    At the time of its conception, the Supreme Court was not meant to be as powerful as it is now. All three branches were meant to have the same amount of power, yet in the present, the Supreme Court arguably holds the most power in the government. As time went on, changes were bound to be made at the federal level; such changes include Roe v. Wade (1973), Brown v. Board (1954), among others. This could have started around the time of the Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruling.
    The Supreme Court makes decisions that change or solidify government policies, and these decisions cannot be vetoed or overruled except by the Supreme Court itself. The executive branch is what “checks” the judicial branch by giving the president the power to nominate a justice and allowing that justice to be confirmed or denied by the Senate. However, due to the fact that Supreme Court judges are on the court for life and have no term limit, this gives them more power. The confirmation of one president’s judge in 1920 still has an impact on the government in 1950, considering that justice serves that long. Politicians realize this, and as a result, the Supreme Court has begun to be increasingly partisan. Already in this presidency, two justices have been confirmed to the Supreme Court, meaning Trump’s influence will outlive his own presidency.
    When there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, it’s a big deal. This could allow the court to lean one way for decades to come, making cases that come to the Supreme Court more likely to go one way than the other. At this point, the Supreme Court is now regarded as a means through which one party can obtain power over the other, even if justices are supposed to be unbiased towards controversial topics like abortion, gay marriage, and the like. Appointing justices is now about giving power to one party, no matter if the House and the Senate changes which party is the majority, or if presidents change multiple times. Because of that, the Supreme Court has become increasingly partisan to an unsavory extent.

    [read less]

    At the time of its conception, the Supreme Court was not meant to be as powerful as it is now. All three branches were meant to have the same amount o…

    [read more]
    0
  • Harsha from Oklahoma

    The partisanship a supreme court nominee experiences as they are getting voted on by the Senate reflects the quality of the nominee and the President who nominated him. We currently have a President who’s approval rating sits well below 45% most of the time and nominating someone as controversial as Brett Kavanaugh will obviously result in some confrontation. Kavanaugh’s records show that he is in no way a moderate and his confirmation will move the court far more to the right.

    [read less]

    The partisanship a supreme court nominee experiences as they are getting voted on by the Senate reflects the quality of the nominee and the President …

    [read more]
    0
  • Luke from Georgia

    The Supreme Court today is undoubtedly more partisan than it was in the past. According to the Stanford Politics news magazine, “In the period between 1801 and 1940, less than 2 percent of all the Supreme Court’s decisions were decided by a 5–4 vote. By contrast, the Rehnquist and Roberts Courts have seen just over 20 percent of their cases be decided by this small margin. This shift provides a clear indication that polarization has indeed spread to the judiciary.” Furthermore, “In the 2014–2015 term, virtually every 5–4 decision the Court gave out was split perfectly along party lines,” indicating the current political polarization of the Supreme Court. Now that the majority of Supreme Court justices lean conservative, Republican views of the court have improved sharply in recent years, according to the PEW Research Center. In August 2016– before the election of President Donald Trump and his subsequent appointment of Neil Gorsuch to the court –about 51% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents had a favorable view of the court. In March 2018, that number went up to 71%, and it is probably even higher due to Brett Kavanaugh’s recent confirmation to the Supreme Court. Why do conservatives have quite favorable opinions of the Supreme Court? Because the conservative-dominated Court rules in favor of conservative, not partisan, principles.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court today is undoubtedly more partisan than it was in the past. According to the Stanford Politics news magazine, “In the period between…

    [read more]
    0
  • Jared from Missouri

    It is expected of Supreme Court justices to keep their politics out of the decision making process but throughout history justices have ruled based on how they feel about the issue. Most justices make decisions on a case by case basis and obviously lean to one side or the other the majority of the time but this doesn’t mean the court itself has become too partisan. With the recent turmoil in the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh it proves if anything the selection process has become too partisan, but not the court itself. The division amongst political ideologies and parties is far more evident in the confirmation committee and the public than the court itself.

    [read less]

    It is expected of Supreme Court justices to keep their politics out of the decision making process but throughout history justices have ruled based on…

    [read more]
    2
    • Dylan from Georgia

      As I do agree with your explanation of the process being too partisan, I believe that the court itself may also be at fault for falling into partisan bias. Regardless of which ideological belief is present, the Supreme Court has consistently ruled decisions based on the partisan majority. This partisan bias has been present and growing for decades and only recently has come to fruition in the last 18 years. During the highly controversial case of Bush V Gore (2000), the state of Florida was the hanging thread in the decision of who our president shall be. The vote between Gore and Bush was so close, (with Bush leading only about 1,800 votes ahead of Gore the morning after), Florida court-ordered a manual recount of the vote to ensure the process had been secure. The request appeared simple and understandable. Once this case was presented to the Supreme Court, the justices among themselves almost indistinguishably voted with a partisan bias and considered the recount “unconstitutional.” This drastic claim against the recount itself comes off rather partisan based than constitutional based. This same partisan bias is universal and isn’t associated to one party, There are plenty of examples over the course of our history as a nation where partisan bias is present. The question is, why is partisan bias found to be repulsive in the first place? The reason why it should be disregarded in the Supreme Court is rather clear, the job of the justices are to follow our constitution and context of the situation, without partisan bias.

      [read less]

      As I do agree with your explanation of the process being too partisan, I believe that the court itself may also be at fault for falling into partisan …

      [read more]
      0
  • Savanna from Virginia

    I believe the Supreme Court has not become more partisan over the years. The Constitution constructed the Judicial Branch (Article III) to have a different but equal opinion. For example, Plessy v. Ferguson was more of a conservative result but Brown v. Board of Education was more of a Liberal repeal to Plessy v. Ferguson. Throughout the years of government from 1787, the political parties of “Republican” and “Democrat” have changed. The ideals of a Democrat in the 1800s are way different than a Democrat today and vice versa. This would make it hard to affiliate justices to a certain political party throughout the years. the past 9 nominations have been by 2 Democratic Presidents and 3 Republican Presidents. You could say that the court is filled with 4 liberal views and 5 conservative views. Throughout the years from the 1800s, the supreme court rulings seem to come in waves of conservative results, liberal results, and centered results. Though you could say the Supreme Court has more conservative justices now, in recent years the rulings have had liberal results.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court has not become more partisan over the years. The Constitution constructed the Judicial Branch (Article III) to have a diff…

    [read more]
    0
  • Hannah from Michigan

    The Supreme Court has not become too Partisan- the whole point of political parties is that the one you are in is lined up with your own opinions. Even if the judges on the Supreme Court did not subscribe to a party, they would still vote on whoever had the same political ideologies as they did. A democrat would not vote on a democrat who had differing views on many things. Parties exist only so you can know the majority of a persons political views based on which party they are in, and if you are in the same party you will likely have the same views. The Supreme Court is not becoming Partisan because it is only common sense to vote on a person who you agree with on most points.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has not become too Partisan- the whole point of political parties is that the one you are in is lined up with your own opinions. Ev…

    [read more]
    0
  • Brandon from Virginia

    The Supreme Court has not become too partisan. Most of the time, the supreme court justices vote based off of their political party. During the Obergefell v. Hodges case, 8/9 of the supreme court justices voted according to their political party. Obergefell v. Hodges was about legalizing same sex marriage, which in the end resulted in the same sex marriage legalized. 4/5 of the republican senators voted against same sex marriage while 4/4 of the democratic senators voted for same sex marriage. Normally, the republican party is known for not supporting same sex marriage while the democratic party is the other way around. Although most of the senators voted for their political platform, there was one senator (Sen. Kennedy) who voted for the platform opposite of his. Ultimately, even if the most senators vote for their political platform, there is always a good chance that the smaller political party can still win, resulting in a non-partisan supreme court.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court has not become too partisan. Most of the time, the supreme court justices vote based off of their political party. During the Oberge…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ayanna from Arizona

    It is obvious that they keep their politics out of the decision making out of the press until they are sure

    0
  • William from Virginia

    The Supreme Court is naturally partisan, due to majority rule. Naturally, a government official is going to vote on a potential Supreme Court justice based on their own political view. Whichever side owns the majority of the voters will most likely get their way. This happened in the voting in of Brett Kavanaugh. Even though he was going through trial due to sexual accusations, he made his way in because the Republican dominated government wanted him. Many democrats opposed him, but they were the minority. It may be unfair to some, but majority rule is a lifestyle. The country is governed by the people, and it’s part-democrat, part-republican government reflects our part-democrat, part-republican population.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court is naturally partisan, due to majority rule. Naturally, a government official is going to vote on a potential Supreme Court justice …

    [read more]
    0
    • Jazmin from Texas

      I completely agree on this view, obviously many of us who would be in that position would go with our gut feeling, what feels right to us. Although when do see many things that hare happening right now it our current time. We see that many of these political figure rather be hard headed and vote on a certain issue or person because of their personal belief rather than facts and the truth.

      [read less]

      I completely agree on this view, obviously many of us who would be in that position would go with our gut feeling, what feels right to us. Although wh…

      [read more]
      0
  • Will from Virginia

    When looking at the Supreme Court, you must thrown out the mindset of Democrat vs. Republican. This mindset cannot be fit into the Supreme Court system. Although a Democrat or Republican may nominate the person, the goal of these people is to take into account facts and determine whether or not our laws are constitutional. In the case Marbury vs. Madison, the Supreme Court gave themselves the power to Judicial Review. This review allows them to determine whether the laws we have created as a nation are Constitutional or not Constitutional. This question must be looked at through a politically central point of view in order to be determined fair. From my observations, the current Justices may lean slightly more left on one issue, but right on the other. This evens itself out and therefore prevents an unfair decision to be made. That is why I do not think that the Supreme Court is too partisan.

    [read less]

    When looking at the Supreme Court, you must thrown out the mindset of Democrat vs. Republican. This mindset cannot be fit into the Supreme Court syste…

    [read more]
    0
  • Sam from Virginia

    The Supreme Court may seem to un-equally balanced towards one party or the other but that’s what makes the justices so reliable. The Supreme Court is supposed to represent members of American society that can rule justly on cases that are presented before them. Trying to make a Supreme Court with no bias’ on either side is virtuall impossible and efforts to do so should be put into other activities.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court may seem to un-equally balanced towards one party or the other but that’s what makes the justices so reliable. The Supreme Court is …

    [read more]
    0
  • Patrick from Virginia

    Has the Supreme Court become to partisan?
    I believe that they haven’t, in my defense there are nine supreme justices meaning that one of the two major parties in the US will have the lead in the number of justices they have leaning towards either party. As much as I do not like the fact that as of right now there are more conservative justices in the supreme court it has been the reverse as well in different times where more liberal justices had more power in the supreme court. It is fair and it is the cause of citizens for not voting that have caused these events. It goes both ways and it is a fair system that allows both to do the same.

    [read less]

    Has the Supreme Court become to partisan?
    I believe that they haven’t, in my defense there are nine supreme justices meaning that one of the two majo…

    [read more]
    0
  • Robert from Virginia

    I do not think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because the Senate is elected by the people so that means that their vote should reflect the vote of the country. In other words, if the senate is mostly republican that means that more republicans are taking apart in today’s voting. In my opinion, if democrats aren’t coming to the polls to vote then they should not be complaining when the results come out. Also, it makes sense that if the senate is mainly republican that they will vote on someone who has the same views as them.

    [read less]

    I do not think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because the Senate is elected by the people so that means that their vote should reflect…

    [read more]
    0
    • ismatu from Virginia

      I disagree with you on this becuse there are a lot of loop holes when it comes to voting in the American system. Final votes of who takes seats in the Senate does not completely come from how many votes are coming from democratcs and republican. You also need to remember the purpose of this so called democracy is for ALL the peoples voices to be heard. So that being said just becuase a republican is elected does not mean the democract followers opinions should be ignored so they yes they do have the right to complain. Those who are complaining that do not take the time to vote for change is a differnt story that needs a seperate conversation.

      [read less]

      I disagree with you on this becuse there are a lot of loop holes when it comes to voting in the American system. Final votes of who takes seats in the…

      [read more]
      0
  • Keita from Virginia

    I do not believe that the Supreme Court has become too Partisan. Partisan will cause lack of movement in the government where nothing is ever finished. Parties accuses other parties of partisan for popularity reasons and for votes. But in fact, these parties do what they believe in which causes controversy on the other side creating the thought of partisan.

    [read less]

    I do not believe that the Supreme Court has become too Partisan. Partisan will cause lack of movement in the government where nothing is ever finished…

    [read more]
    0
  • Daniel from Virginia

    Even though the Supreme Court Justice is supposed to remain impartial it is practically impossible for him/her to avoid making decisions based on his/her party’s political ideology. There is always going to be an underlying bias. However, this underlying bias is not necessarily an issue. If a judge is appointed from the party with a majority of supporters, the will of the people will remain intact and the bias of the judge would not matter because he/she is supportive of ideas from the party with the most support of the people.

    [read less]

    Even though the Supreme Court Justice is supposed to remain impartial it is practically impossible for him/her to avoid making decisions based on his/…

    [read more]
    0
  • Rebekah from Colorado

    The main problem encountered when adressing this issue is the assumption that the Supreme Court should not be political. When we return to the groundbreaking polititcal discourse of great Greek philosophers such as Aristotle, we see that everything is political. It is therefore foolish to attempt to make the supreme court apolitical. We should rather be striving to obtain justices who are capable and willing to engage in quantifiable bipartisan decisions. If we continue attempting to bypass politics, we will dismantle any potential for progress that still remains.

    [read less]

    The main problem encountered when adressing this issue is the assumption that the Supreme Court should not be political. When we return to the groundb…

    [read more]
    0
  • Casey from New York

    The supreme court hasn’t become too partisan. The judicial branch is dependent on the other branches of government, which are very partisan, to agree. The supreme court is going to be as partisan as the times allow them to be. As long as people believe the supreme court holds the power to unilaterally create law by looking at the constitution and reading in things not intended by the founders, the other branches will always believe the court is partisan. However, the court has many originalists there not beholden to their particular party winning.

    [read less]

    The supreme court hasn’t become too partisan. The judicial branch is dependent on the other branches of government, which are very partisan, to agree….

    [read more]
    0
  • Keith from Illinois

    I believe the Supreme Court is doing its’s judicial duty and focusing on whats constitutional and what is unconstitutional. With top of the line experts serving in the court system and not being political, but focusing on what really matters and how to work together.

    [read less]

    I believe the Supreme Court is doing its’s judicial duty and focusing on whats constitutional and what is unconstitutional. With top of the line exper…

    [read more]
    0
  • Skylar from New Mexico

    The Supreme Court is a direct reflection of our country. Just as there are conservative, moderate, and liberal thinkers throughout our society…the Justices are also an amalgamation of diverse thought. Each judge published throughout their law career allowing us to know their stance on important issues. Each President chose Justices which reflected the beliefs mirrored by their constituency. I believe, the Justices are a diverse group of thinkers and reflect who we are as a voting public.

    [read less]

    The Supreme Court is a direct reflection of our country. Just as there are conservative, moderate, and liberal thinkers throughout our society…the J…

    [read more]
    0
    • Noah from Virginia

      I agree that the Supreme Court is a direct reflection because it deals directly with the people. It deals with everyday issues that come from all over the United States. It plays an active role in the interpretation of the laws. I also understand that everybody has their own bias and it influences their decisions and their preferences. This is one of the main reasons that Judge Kavanaugh was able to be elected because enough of the Justices decided that they agree with Kavanaugh and it’s their personal preference. Finally, I totally agree with you that each Judge is important because they take their own take and preference on each topic/issue/problem addressed.

      [read less]

      I agree that the Supreme Court is a direct reflection because it deals directly with the people. It deals with everyday issues that come from all over…

      [read more]
      0
  • Brian from Indiana

    No. It’s finally even.

    0
  • Carson from Montana

    No i dont think the Supreme Court is to partisan but the opposing parties both accuse each other of making it to partisan because accusing the opposite party of it makes people think it is so they then vote for the opposing party getting them more votes. This is just a game played by each party to try to get the people on their side when saying its to partisan is just a hoax. The democratic party are the ones talking about it now just to take away presidents Trumps accomplishment of getting two more supreme court justices approved. The democratic party is saying that trump is to partisan with his nominations but to become approved both sides have to agree.

    [read less]

    No i dont think the Supreme Court is to partisan but the opposing parties both accuse each other of making it to partisan because accusing the opposit…

    [read more]
    0
  • kenneth from Kentucky

    Though yes there will always be some partisanship in the court there will only be worthy applicants accepted to this high end position. so no i do not believe it it “too” partisan. In the case of kavanaugh, in my mind he definitely deserves a spot.

    [read less]

    Though yes there will always be some partisanship in the court there will only be worthy applicants accepted to this high end position. so no i do not…

    [read more]
    0
  • Ben from Kentucky

    I don’t think they have become too partisan because of the fact nothing ever gets done within the government. All people do is fight and nobody can agree on anything. Power is equal throughout the government and that is why we can’t get anything down we need more people who can listen to both sides and make a compromise between the 2 parties.

    [read less]

    I don’t think they have become too partisan because of the fact nothing ever gets done within the government. All people do is fight and nobody can ag…

    [read more]
    0
  • Morgan from Kentucky

    I do not think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because there are still numerous ways to reach a solution/compromise, instead of the Supreme Court and government constantly wasting time arguing and not accomplishing anything. I feel that if the Supreme Court did not become too partisan, then our government might actually get somewhere in producing effective laws, staying on task, and helping our nation to reach its full potential.

    [read less]

    I do not think that the Supreme Court has become too partisan because there are still numerous ways to reach a solution/compromise, instead of the Sup…

    [read more]
    0
  • Paige from Indiana

    No, I do not believe the supreme court has become too partisan. I believe that both parties needs to be strong in order to equally combat each other and have the ideals of both parties represented in supreme court cases.

    [read less]

    No, I do not believe the supreme court has become too partisan. I believe that both parties needs to be strong in order to equally combat each other a…

    [read more]
    0
  • Benjamin from Kentucky

    The debate over the Supreme Court becoming to Partisan should end here. A Branch like this is vital for the Government, as it serves as a middle man between the other two branches. This helps prevent documents proposed by Congress from becoming unconstitutional. People are ok with this but not with them dealing with political problems?

    [read less]

    The debate over the Supreme Court becoming to Partisan should end here. A Branch like this is vital for the Government, as it serves as a middle man b…

    [read more]
    0
  • rachel from Kentucky

    No, I don’t think the supreme court has become too partisan because they are just doing what they believe is equal. They try their best to keep neutrality among everyone and come to just compromises. The whole Kavanaugh issue was over exaggerated and the Supreme Court followed the rules when handling the whole situation.

    [read less]

    No, I don’t think the supreme court has become too partisan because they are just doing what they believe is equal. They try their best to keep neutra…

    [read more]
    0
  • Isabella from Kentucky

    Honestly, I do not believe that the supreme court is partisan. I think it is too conservative and not diverse enough. We will never all get along or agree, I think there should be an equal amount of parties.

    [read less]

    Honestly, I do not believe that the supreme court is partisan. I think it is too conservative and not diverse enough. We will never all get along or …

    [read more]
    0
  • Garret from California

    Partisanship has been inherent from the Supreme Court since the moment John Marshall, John Adams’ Secretary of State, stepped on to the Supreme Court in 1801 and through his rulings established judicial review and massively strengthened the federal government, key tenets of the Federalist Platform. In fact upon further examination every single Chief Justice of the Supreme Court between Marshall and Warren Burger ,who was confirmed in 1969, has either served as a cabinet member (including his successor Roger Taney), a partisan legislator or an elected Governor. The very idea that a Justice should not be a politician is extremely new and could still easily change considering that it was less than 10 years ago when George W Bush nominated Harriet Miers, his own White House Counsel. If anything the idea of nominating career judges instead of politicians has made the nomination process less partisan. The reason the Kavanaugh process was so contentious was because it became wrapped up in a larger culture war at the center of the partisan struggle: what is the appropriate response to claims of sexual harassment. That is not to say that the Kavanaugh proceedings did not shed light on a problem that we as a country are going to have to face. In a time where partisanship is such a driving force how do we determine what is actually problematic behavior? Due to the rise of social media we are only going to know more and more about every unwise thing our leaders have ever done and due to a fragmentation of media the odds of there being a consensus on what to do with any given individual is extremely low and will only occur in the most egregious and proof laden occurrences. Our strong partisan tendencies have only exacerbated this problem even more. I am confident that once this bigger issue is figured out that concerns about partisanship will dissolve away and be forgotten just like the brutal partisanship of most of American history. As much as we like to think our partisan climate is bad, it is well known that negative newspaper editorials about Andrew Jackson’s wife were a key factor in her social exclusion and death. This issue will resolve itself in time if we focus on the true problems of our day.

    [read less]

    Partisanship has been inherent from the Supreme Court since the moment John Marshall, John Adams’ Secretary of State, stepped on to the Supreme Cour…

    [read more]
    0
  • Dylan from Iowa

    I don’t believe the supreme court itself has become too partisan, but I do believe the way our government has treated nominations has become too partisan. Justice Gorsuch, for example, had support from many democrats when he was nominated to other federal courts, but once a Republican president nominated him for a seat, their support seemed to disappear. The Supreme Court’s job is to interpret the law, so therefore we should find justices who will interpret it the way it is written, which is what both of Trump’s nominees do. The court is not partisan, our nomination process is.

    [read less]

    I don’t believe the supreme court itself has become too partisan, but I do believe the way our government has treated nominations has become too parti…

    [read more]
    0