In all of the pages that I have seen there are two ideas that I consider fundamental to Justice.
- Objectivity - the ability to consider both sides of an argument fairly and with impartiality and understanding.
- Independance - the appearance and fact of holding the position and authority with no duty or obligation to any other person.
Yes, in the Senate selection process there is "close" examination of each candidate on "favourite topics" such as abortion. The purpose of the approach is to reveal any preconceptions and prejudgements on those specific topics. But does it go far enough?
Dave Justus 10/5/05 picks up on the idea with a quote from Bush himself -
''It's important that whomever I pick is viewed as an independent person from politics. It's this independence of the Fed that gives people, not only here in America but the world, confidence.''
DJ - This is at least as important as a supreme court nomination.
But that is the Chairman of the Federal Bank, not a Justice to the SCOTUS. I agree with Dave, but he misses the point in his next post on Miers.
So, tell me America.
What is it about your justice system that the qualifications for President of the Fed are considered more strictly than a Supreme Court Judge?