U.S. Supreme Court Quiz

Wow!! Awesome!!

Prepare to update this quiz!

I got 2. A little reminder that I should study this topic more.

Technically out of date since Scalia is dead, but I guess there's no point in updating until/unless his replacement is confirmed.

Neil Gorsuch should be added.

Who is Stephen Breyer. Dude must fly so far under the radar. I've literally never heard of him. I got 8 and thought, who am I missing, thinking it was someone obvious that I was forgetting. Nope...someone I never heard of.

He is the fourth member of the liberal wing, but yes, he is often overshadowed by the other three liberal justices: Sotomayor and Kagan, because they were both appointed by Obama and are clearer in people's memories, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who is the outspoken and de facto leader of the liberal wing.

1/9. I only knew The Notorious RBG!

I always forget one when trying to remember them all. This time it was Alito. Sigh.

+1

ah I see what you're doing there, deflecting a valid criticism by bringing up your skepticism about another, completely unrelated, but even more valid and concerning criticism, here addressed in raging strawman form since while we know with absolute certainty some of the very shady/troubling/illegal things that have been going on concerning Russia if you start acting as if someone has paranoid delusions that Putin is behind everything, that minimizes those very real, very valid, very legitimate and well-founded concerns. Genius. Not really.

what?

Is there really a valid criticism of his legitimacy though? He was nominated and confirmed.

There is no VALID criticism of his legitimacy. You can dislike him, or the politicians that confirmed him...you can dislike the idea of constitutional textualist justices over more a liberal interpretation of the constitution...all that is fine and healthy criticism. What makes no sense is the sky-is-falling rhetoric calling into question his legitimacy or crying that "democracy is dead." Those are not valid arguments.

How is it that I'm very familiar with all of these justices for one reason or another, but, I don't think I've ever even heard of Breyer before...

I miss him every time. I don't think he writes any decisions...he's not in the press....he just does his job. I'm not even sure if he's a liberal or a conservative judge. I think he's a liberal judge since he's a Clinton appointee, but I have no idea on what his actual jurisprudence is like.

Gorsuch!!

Please not Kavanaugh!!!

BOOM!

After the shambles of the 2018 confirmation, there's good reason to consider term limits on Supreme Court justices. They have become so politicised. Lifetime appointments cast such a biasing shadow on US politics regardless of which party is in control of the presidency, senate and house.

I've been interested a lot in the current political situation (especially the Midterms) in the US. I honestly think that the cultural division between Democrats and Republicans is getting bigger and bigger. Furthermore, I think that many politicians take "party over country". Maybe for SCOTUS not only term limits, but also minimum amount of senators (like 60 voting in favour). I clearly see that a two-party-system is not working in this case.

"A plague on both their houses." That's an excellent quote, very applicable to this case.

In Europe two-third majority is usually required

Great idea.

Yeah...I've heard this before as well. I like it. One of the big problems is that we've allowed the courts to become too powerful. Both Madison and Hamilton in the Federalist Papers talked about the judicial branch as being the smallest and least powerful of the 3 branches, but now it's on par with the executive branch and both have left the legislative branch in the dust. Personally, I want 535 people that represent my voting interests making laws. Not 9 unelected life appointees.

In New Zealand, Supreme Court justices they are not voted into office by partisan votes of the legislature, but simply appointed to the court in a non-political way. The mandatory age of retirement is 70. Additionally, there is acceptance of the paramountcy of the legislature; thus the Court never seeks to "strike down" laws. Instead, they simply interpret and apply the law as it stands.

I feel like "RBG" should probably be an accepted answer, since that's come to be a common way of referring to her (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RBG_(film)).

Why is RGB accepted instead of RBG?

When Ginsburg retires the court will be ruthless.