When you buy through links on our site , we may gain an affiliate commission . Here ’s how it cultivate .
government aside , free-base on the 112 justices who have served on the U.S. Supreme Court thus far , what qualities should the idealistic DoJ have ?
That is , what traits do judges require besides knowing the law deep down and out ?
The Supreme Court justices wait to hear President Barack Obama’s last State of the Union address on Capitol Hill 4 March 2025 in Washington, D.C.
This dubiousness is on the minds of many as Supreme Court candidate Judge Neil Gorsuch prepares for his confirmation hearing this year . Here ’s a lean of five admirable quality that historiographer say have benefited Department of Justice and the Margaret Court they ’ve served . [ 8 Supreme Court Decisions That convert US Families ]
1. Collegiality
Justices can serve on the Supreme Court for life , so it ’s vital they get along with and respect one another . But collegiality also serves another purpose : This timbre can help a judge bring another justice to his or her side during a case , experts assure Live Science .
" Justice [ Clarence ] Thomas , who is often in the minority , once said we have to keep cordial relations , because the individual who vote against me today , I may take him or her tomorrow for another view , " suppose Melvin Urofsky , the editor program of the Journal of Supreme Court History .
This is why Justice almost always sign a dissent with the idiom " respectfully submitted , " Urofsky said .
Collegiality is paramount , order Mark Graber , trustee ' professor at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law . Justice Department postulate " the ability to understand and get along with people on the court of law , " he tell Live Science .
2. Intelligence and modesty
It ’s an understatement to say that justices on the Supreme Court need to be saucy , but they also need to have a good sense of themselves , Urofsky say .
" Some of the worst justice who have been on the court were multitude who really did n’t want to be there , did n’t have a strong sense of who they were in terms of law , " Urofsky said . " [ They ] were frightened or overawed ofother people on the court , " because they thought these other justices were smarter .
In addition to being bright , it ’s significant for justices to be modest , Graber said . Justices need to realize " that on the Supreme Court , you could not solve the problems of the world . You ’re a Supreme Court justice and not a celebrity . "
Former Justice David Souter is a good example of an intelligent but modest justice , Graber enjoin . Souter did n’t go out of his way to pen sound bites like a celebrity , but " he had a estimable sense of what the homage could do and what the motor lodge could n’t do , " Graber said . " He was not a court leader , but his opinions demonstrated that he understand that judges are judging human beings andhuman being are not everlasting beings . "
3. Respect for the court
In addition to having respect for one another , justices should respect the psychiatric hospital that they serve . This means understanding that the discriminative branch is self-governing and one - third of administration , Urofsky say .
" Practically every justness nominate has , at one time or another , disappointed the president who named him [ or her ] , " Urofsky said . " I cogitate Gorsuch already be intimate that , because he ’s been a Union judge . "
" I do n’t think [ Gorsuch ] was playing up to the Democrats on that , " Urofsky said . " I think he stand for that . "
( subsequently , White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Blumenthal was speak in general terms , not responding to anything the president had done . )
4. Varied backgrounds
Presidents once put up judge with diverse backgrounds , choosing senators , law schooltime prof and prominent attorneys , Urofsky said . However , ever since Richard Nixon ’s administration , most of the nominating address have been judges from lower courts , for the most part because these individual appear easier to affirm than nonjudges , Urofsky said .
" I recall it ’s been a fully grown mistake , " Urofsky order . " We used to have judges who had some political experience . "
By this , Urofsky said he does n’t think that justices should , at some dot , make political office . Rather , like former U.S. JusticesLouis Brandeis(who drop dead in 1941 ) or Felix Frankfurter ( who died in 1965 ) , it might be helpful if justices had served as advisors to the chairperson or in other branches of politics , Urofsky said .
For instance , Department of Justice need to be mindful of how cases play out in the real world , as a politician would , Urofsky pronounce . " What I would care to see in the ideal evaluator is someone who at least translate how the authorities actually solve , " Urofsky say .
5. What not to do
Some past judges had some , but not all of these ideal timbre . For example , Justice Frankfurter"may have been one of the brightest to ever go on the court , " but his self was big and he frequently jaw his fellow justices , Urofsky say .
" They would n’t brook it , " Urofsky said . " These are people who had unassailable egos of their own . [ Former Justice ] William O. Douglas , whenever Frankfurter used to commence speak , would pick up his mail , go to the lounge and pose there and take care of his mail .
" When Frankfurter was done , [ Douglas ] would say something like , ' I was ready to vote the other manner , untilFelix babble out me out of it . ' In other give-and-take , he would have voted with Felix until he heard Felix talk , " Urofsky said .
Original article onLive Science .
