Supremely Important

We take pride as a nation
that our government is
grounded in a
system of 
checks and balances.

Three equal branches of government...

Each with its own purpose...

Each with its own power...

Each supremely important.

This week, our nation is watching a
drama unfold between all three branches...
Executive, Legislative, and Judicial .

The Senate is holding additional hearings for 
President Trump's nominee,
Judge Brett Kavanaugh,
to fill a spot on the Supreme Court
left open by the retirement of
Justice Anthony Kennedy.

This might be a good time for a little 
Supreme Court confirmation trivia...

Q:
Who was the last Supreme Court justice
to be confirmed by unanimous vote of the Senate?

A:
Justice Anthony Kennedy!

Wait...did you read that correctly?

The confirmation was unanimous?

In the Senate?

Is that even possible?

It was in 1987,
the year Kennedy was confirmed. 

Unanimous  

That's certainly a word we don't hear often connected with Congress.  

But why not?

The process surrounding confirmation hearings for
Supreme Court justices has become
so politicized over the years, 
it's hard to imagine any nominee
having unanimous support.  

And yet, there have been many unanimous
or nearly unanimous confirmations
of justices in the Supreme Court's history. 

Why is it so difficult today?

Is there a better way forward?

We'll watch and wait this week as the Senate hears testimony and 
and makes a final decision about the Kavanaugh nomination.

As we're watching and waiting,
let's ask ourselves...

What do WE think about the whole confirmation process?
Is something broken with the system?
 Is there a way to fix it?

What are the
Purple Points
surrounding the
selection of
Supreme Court
justices?  

Does the simple majority Senate vote make sense?
Would some kind of supermajority--60 votes--or 2/3--be better?
Could we even ask for a 3/4 majority?  Would that be possible?
What about the tenure for Supreme Court justices?
Should justices continue to have lifelong appointments?
If they had term limits, what might that look like?
Would it be better to stagger the replacement of justices somehow?

It's in our nation's best interest
to keep politics
out of the Supreme Court. 

Maintaining the integrity
of the Supreme Court
is vital for our beloved
checks and balances.

Let's work together 
to
find a better way
forward.

It's important work...
supremely important!



​ 



​