Skip to main content

Supreme Court appointees

Image result for Supreme Court

Someone asked me recently what qualities I believe a Supreme Court appointee should have.

I'm the author of a book on related issues, considered historically. But I had never thought to create such a list.

Putting aside anarchistic arguments, thinking within the box of the existing constitutional system, I offer the following. [I'll use the generic pronoun 'he' below for convenience only.]

  • He should be independent-spirited, willing to tell anyone (including the other 8, including the consensus of legal opinion, including the President who appointed him) to go to hell rather than putting himself in the wrong in his own eyes.
  • He should be learned in the HISTORY of the law. He should commune in his own mind not with the other eight folks in the conference room with him, but with Jean Bodin, Edward Coke, John Marshall, and Hugo Black.
  • Finally, he should have some experience of the business world. Perhaps just by having run a law office with his own name on the door at some time in his life, worrying about everything from hiring a qualified secretary to paying the light bill, and of course serving the interests of the customers, uh, clients.


Popular posts from this blog

Great Chain of Being

One of the points that Lovejoy makes in the book of that title I mentioned last week is the importance, in the Neo-Platonist conceptions and in the later development of the "chain of being" metaphor, of what he calls the principle of plenitude. This is the underlying notion that everything that can exist must exist, that creation would not be possible at all were it to leave gaps.

The value of this idea for a certain type of theodicy is clear enough.

This caused theological difficulties when these ideas were absorbed into Christianity.  I'll quote a bit of what Lovejoy has to say about those difficulties:

"For that conception, when taken over into Christianity, had to be accommodated to very different principles, drawn from other sources, which forbade its literal interpretation; to carry it through to what seemed to be its necessary implications was to be sure of falling into one theological pitfall or another."

The big pitfalls were: determinism on the on…

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majestic wate…