Question

Sue and Tim are arguing about the value of appointing rather than electing federal judges. Sue says the judges should be elected. Which of the following statements supports her position?
a- Judges in most federal court positions are elected so it should be the same way at the state and local level as well.
b- Judges are representatives of the people in government just like other officials and should represent majority will.
c- Judges who are elected will make their decisions in isolation from people's opinion and perform better as a result.
d- Judges that consult with other federal officials on the will of the people do not consider the law in their decisions.

Answer 1

Answer:

b- Judges are representatives of the people in government just like other officials and should represent majority will.

Explanation:

The other three speak the opposite of what Sue wants to say, becaus if judges are elected they are submitted to the likeness of the people, and their decision can affect their "electiveness", so they could perform differently when knowing that one hard controversial decision could affect the public view of him. And they can also start making decision based on what the public wants him to do.

Answer 2

Answer:

Option C is correct which states that Judges who are elected will make their decisions in isolation from people's opinion and perform better as a result.