Answer:
The constitutional formula for appointing members of the highest judicial body of the United States is very concise: judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of the United States and must be approved by the majority of the Senate. However, behind this simple wording, a rather complicated and, in some cases, dramatic political and legal procedure . The Senate is the main limiter of the respective presidential powers. Initially, the candidacy of a judge is considered by the Senate Legal Committee, which can also schedule direct hearings with the participation of the candidate.
Namely the presidential power, partly limited by the Senate majority, determines the political and legal entity of the US Supreme Court. However, it should be noted such a feature of the judiciary as the longest term of office (the average term in the US Supreme Court is about 20 years) in relation to both the presidential administration (four years and a maximum of eight years in total) and the Senate (six years, despite the fact that every two years a third of senators is re-elected). Thus, current US presidents often form the composition of the Court not so much to ensure their own cooperation with the judiciary as they determine the future nature of the complex mechanism of checks and balances in the United States.
A brief constitutional formula for the appointment of judges in the practice of its implementation is supplemented by a significant number of formal and informal requirements for candidates. The tendency of expanding the representation of various social groups (gender, faith, age, racial, national, socio-economic) as part of the current Court has been identified. The current situation with the appointment of a new judge of the Supreme Court is complicated by the proximity of elections and the possibility of dragging out the procedure until the new president takes office, the party and ideological confrontation between the democratic President and the Republican majority of the Senate, the fundamental importance of a new judge who can significantly change the ideology and practice of the Court in a liberal direction, ok, let's?
Explanation:
