Supreme Court justices are often chosen on the basis of their qualifications. However, since being a judge is a political position, justices can also be chosen based on their political viewpoints.
Chat with our AI personalities
validate a descrimination on the basis of ancestry
5, 6, and 14.
Any court, even a lower state or federal District Court, can find a federal law that is relevant to a case or controversy before that count unconstitutional, if the court has a rational basis for making such determination. These cases often end up being petitioned to the US Supreme Court for a definitive answer.
It is the basis for the excersie of judicial review
No, eight of the nine members of the current Court served as US Court of Appeals Circuit judges prior to being elevated to the Supreme Court, and Justice Sotomayor has also served as a District Court (trial) judge. The newest justice to join the Court, Elena Kagan, is the lone exception; she has served as US Solicitor General, Associate White House Counsel, Dean of Harvard Law School, and as a Law Professor, but had no judicial experience prior to taking the Oath of Office on August 7, 2010. Having prior judicial experience is not a constitutional requirement, but a fairly recent trend toward seating justices with prior judicial experience for practical purposes. It was less common in the past to select candidates with judicial experience. At one time, members of the Court were more likely to be selected from the political ranks: former Senators, House members, cabinet members, State Governors, and members of State legislature were well represented. Some past justices had made distinguished careers as lawyers, and were selected on the basis of their legal reputations. Kagan was US Solicitor General immediately prior to her nomination, the first justice in 40 years not to have experience on the bench. There are no constitutionally mandated qualifications for Supreme Court Justices; however, all 112 past and present members of the Court are, or have been, lawyers.