3 ms·
This has got me thinking - why don't we just stack rank all federal judges and pick the top 9 to be on the Supreme Court? I mean obviously it's a silly question
by hotpotamus 5y ago
This has got me thinking - why don't we just stack rank all federal judges and pick the top 9 to be on the Supreme Court? I mean obviously it's a silly question but interesting to think about the KPIs for judges. But I believe really the answer is that today when law is effectively written by the courts, the main consideration is how they will vote. And given that the court is currently stacked to vote only for elite conservative priorities, it hardly matters who Biden picks anyway.
- salawat 5y agoHoly jumping Jesuits. No. Just... No. This has never worked well on any private org, and it will definitely not work in the Judiciary, especially since to establish that vaunted KPI you'd need to measure against something objective, and so much of the legal system would be undone since the subjective weighs very heavily into it. Otherwise you wouldn't have things like the Ninth Circuit (which I think would be an improvement), yet I'm reluctant to say that throwing that subjectivity out isn't in some way part of a long term check or balance...
- hotpotamus 5y agoIndeed, it would seem that meritocracy is something of a myth? Or perhaps a half-truth? How can one work hard to achieve a subjective indicator? This subject just made me think about it a bit. There are probably thousands (10's of thousands?) of judges fit to sit on the Supreme Court who have all the merit, and yet statistically speaking basically none of them ever will which makes any selection unfair, no? This might actually be one reason to enlarge the court, but of course you'll still have many more qualified candidates than slots.