[EL] an idea to break the logjam on a US Supreme Court appointment

[Thomas J. Cares]

Highly inappropriate for jurists (though I don't expect better of the
elected kind), let alone SCOTUS justices, to make a pledge regarding future
decisions to appease the political branches.

On Tuesday, February 16, 2016, Richard Winger <richardwinger at yahoo.com>
wrote:

> If the 8 members of the US Supreme Court were to publicly pledge to
> respect stare decisis on abortion, campaign finance, gays, and guns, I
> think the US Senate and President Obama could work together to get a new
> nominee on the Court in the next few months.  I think Senator McConnell
> would be moved by such a pledge by all 8 justices.  The nation would become
> more unified with such pledges, and in a moment of true danger from severe
> divisiveness, such pledges would be in the public interest.
>
> The justices these days speak to audiences at law schools and other venues
> anyway.  There is nothing unseemly about their speaking publicly about this.
>
> And if the members of the Court were to do that, it would forestall Ted
> Cruz' rhetoric that the 2nd amendment is in danger of being gutted.
>
> Richard Winger 415-922-9779 PO Box 470296, San Francisco Ca 94147
>


--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20160215/190ffd69/attachment.html>