Supreme court justices should be more diverse

Published 6:53 pm Wednesday, February 24, 2016

As if we were not already bogged down in bickering, sniping and outright lying by potential presidential candidates, there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court to consider. The sudden death of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has brought on further division as to who, when and how the replacement should be made.

Did I mention the opinions are as split as the Supreme Court itself along political ideological lines as to how it should be accomplished? The court itself has become so ideology divided they cannot agree unanimously on anything. We have been forced to live with five justices deciding cases before the court for over 300 million people for years now with no relief in sight. Just one time I would like to see a unanimous decision out of this elite group of over-educated lawyers. They are not suppose to make law, but rather to interpret the written law, the Constitution.

This is a problem we simply should not be having out of justices appointed for life with absolutely no recourse on the decisions they make whether within the Constitution or not.

Email newsletter signup

In my opinion, there is no place for political ideologist on the court interpreting the Constitution. A Supreme Court justice should have to check their party affiliation at the door upon confirmation and putting on their robes.

Their job is to interpret what is written in the Constitution and do so according to the original intent by the founding fathers.

It doesn’t appear to be such a tough job if they would leave politics and pop culture out of it. Personally, I like what former Associate Justice Scalia said about the Constitution.

“The Constitution is not a living organism,” he said. “It’s a legal document, and it says what it says and doesn’t say what it doesn’t say.”

Unfortunately, the Constitution is being hijacked by liberal’s intent on it saying what it doesn’t say.

Also, justices applying their own closed-mindedness to simple words written down in black and white with common sense reasoning.

Of the eight remaining justices on the Supreme Court, four were born in New York — Roberts, Ginsberg, Kagan and Sotomayor — one in New Jersey — Alito — two in California — Breyer and Kennedy, — and one in Georgia — Thomas.

Five of the nine justices are from the New York and New Jersey area. Is that not a little out of balance with the rest of the country?

All the women serving on the present court were born in New York.

I believe the court should better reflect the country with a broader geographic representation deciding these issues of monumental proportions, especially if we continue to allow the court to be a political tool.

I believe the court was intended to be separate and independent of the political fray.