Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Chief Justice Rehnquist has died

This is topic Chief Justice Rehnquist has died in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=004249

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 09-04-2005, 12:13 AM:

He dide on Saturday night.. [Frown]

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 09-04-2005, 02:53 AM:

I saw this earlier tonight. I was kinda shocked, and kinda not so shocked. His health hasn't been the best for a while now, but he always tried to put on a strong face for the country. I always thought he seemed like the "elder" of the court, if that makes sense. RIP.

Posted by Jim Ziegler (Member # 86) on 09-04-2005, 06:44 AM:

He is going to be very hard to replace.

Posted by Steve Scott (Member # 630) on 09-04-2005, 12:55 PM:

It is Steve's fault this thread went south. Complain to him.

[ 09-10-2005, 02:22 PM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-09-2005, 01:56 PM:

quote: Mark J. Marshall
I always thought he seemed like the "elder" of the court, if that makes sense.

He was the oldest member of the Court having been appointed by Nixon in the early 1970's. Reagan mande him Chief Justice in 1986.

Further comments removed. It's Aaron's fault, too.

[ 09-10-2005, 02:23 PM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]

Posted by Michael Schaffer (Member # 1204) on 09-09-2005, 07:56 PM:

2 questions: how important/influential is the supreme court and the composition of its members? And why don't the judges retire at a certain age? I understand Rehnquist was 80 years.

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 09-09-2005, 09:01 PM:

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Justices are nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress/Senate. Appointments are for life, and there is no set retirement age.

Basically Michael, under the U.S. Constitution, the three branches of government: Executive (President), Judicial (Supreme Court) and Legislative (Congress/Senate) are set up so that they each "oversee" each other.

The Supreme Court decides what cases it will hear or not hear. And cases begin at the lower end of the Judicial system and work their way up to the Supreme Court via the appeals process. And the cases that the Supreme Court deals with transverse all aspects of American life.

The U.S. Constitution gives all the specifics (in rather easy to understand wording) of all three major branches of the U.S. Government.

Hope this helps.

Kutler

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-09-2005, 09:20 PM:

Yes, as Will sez, that is true. Unfortunately, the Supreme court justices, like all federal judges, are appointed for (their) life. NO matter how ***bad OR political*** they are, we're stuck with them. The nominees all depend on the sitting US President's whims.

That's why the confirmation process is soooo critical.

I'd like to see their term limited to like ... Ummmm 10-20 years.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 09-09-2005, 09:37 PM:

quote: Phil Hill
NO matter how ***bad OR political*** they are, we're stuck with them.

But I guess the flip side to that is that a good and apolitical judge can't be kicked out of office for doing his or her job properly in a way that steps on political toes.

Posted by Phil Hill (Member # 371) on 09-09-2005, 09:52 PM:

That's true Leo... it cuts both ways...and again, that's why the confirmation process is very important.

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 09-10-2005, 11:36 AM:

Historically, the Founders didn't even know what the Court was supposed to do. They realized there should be some type of nationalized venue in which litigants could appeal if they felt lower courts misread their complaints, but the Constitution is quite vague as to what the ultimate role was to be.

The Court was discussed late in the Constitutional Convention of 1787 (about mid-August of that year), and many delegates were eager to get back to their home states before winter would restrict their travel. To them, Congress was the most important branch in the new government and most of the heated debates and compromises settled around the formation of that body. The first Supreme Court conviened (I believe) in 1790 and had almost no docket that first year. Most of the older Founders such as Rufus King and John Jay served as some of our first Justices.

The first case of monumental importance to come before the Court was Marbury v. Madison (1801). It centered around the appointment of William Marbury as a judge to a lower Federal Court in the last hours of the Presidency of John Adams. Marbury was a Federalist, the political party in which the modern-day Republicans indirectly descend from. Incoming Democrat Secretary of State James Madison cancelled Marbury's appointment, filling the position with one of his guys. Marbury sued and the case went before the Court. Chief Justice John Marshall ruled Marbury gets his judgeship, BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, the Supreme Court would now serve as a check on the other branches of government so no one branch could become more powerful than the other two. This is what we call Judicial Review .

In light of what is about to happen, given two new Justices will be appointed to the Court very soon, it is important to remember the history and how this branch has come into its own over the past 200 years.

Posted by Pravin Ratnam (Member # 1417) on 09-10-2005, 01:28 PM:

Aaron, I thought we were going to keep politics out of these threads.

A tad bit more moderating, and I'm done!

[ 09-10-2005, 02:24 PM: Message edited by: Adam Martin ]

Posted by Adam Martin (Member # 641) on 09-10-2005, 02:16 PM:

Some of you people suck. This discussion should have ended after the second post.