A More Perfect Constitution Summary
In chapter three of his book A More Perfect Constitution, Sabato addresses the main issues that he sees with the current Supreme Court. He begins by addressing the growing entitlement of the court, citing a recent incident in which several judges insisted against allowing cameras into the Court. Sabato believes that these cameras could have helped to reveal potential problems in the Court’s proceedings and that this prevention of cameras showed the privilege and power given to these judges. Sabato continues to describe the issues with the Court’s lack of review to ensure judge fitness and how this allows them to interpret the Constitution improperly, disregarding its original goals. After this introduction, Sabato moves onto describing the
…show more content…
Although having increased slots in the Supreme Court would boost the potential for diversity, the amendment fails to cause any meaningful change in the actual diversity of the Court. Additionally, allowing for the possibility of a deadlocked Supreme Court would greatly increase the power of the appellate court. This power increase could have some negative side effects, as appointments to the appellate court do not have the same scrutiny as Supreme Court appointments. Sabato’s third amendment has too many issues to be applied to the Constitution, striking a strong contrast to his fourth amendment. Sabato’s final amendment, in my opinion, would bring a much-needed improvement to the federal courts. Naturally, these judges need to have a salary that covers their living expenses, as requiring judges to ask for raises from Congress can allow for serious biases or manipulation to enter play. This amendment also lacks any meaningful downsides, as its worst drawback is simply increasing spending by the federal government. Overall, while two of Sabato’s amendments would work well, the second and third would bring many issues and need more
Although having increased slots in the Supreme Court would boost the potential for diversity, the amendment fails to cause any meaningful change in the actual diversity of the Court. Additionally, allowing for the possibility of a deadlocked Supreme Court would greatly increase the power of the appellate court. This power increase could have some negative side effects, as appointments to the appellate court do not have the same scrutiny as Supreme Court appointments. Sabato’s third amendment has too many issues to be applied to the Constitution, striking a strong contrast to his fourth amendment. Sabato’s final amendment, in my opinion, would bring a much-needed improvement to the federal courts. Naturally, these judges need to have a salary that covers their living expenses, as requiring judges to ask for raises from Congress can allow for serious biases or manipulation to enter play. This amendment also lacks any meaningful downsides, as its worst drawback is simply increasing spending by the federal government. Overall, while two of Sabato’s amendments would work well, the second and third would bring many issues and need more