All categories

2 years ago

Describe the process of the selection of federal judges

Law

2 answers:

viva [34]2 years ago

8 0

Answer:

Federal judges are judges who serve in a federal court. The term refers both to the Article III federal judges and to Article I federal judges, who serve as magistrate and bankruptcy judges, and in other Article III tribunals.

Federal judges are nominated by the president of the United States and confirmed by the Senate. The various steps to the process is given below:

The president nominates an candidate for a judicial seat.
The candidate fills out a questionnaire which is reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
The <em>Senate Judiciary Committee </em>holds a hearing with the candidate, interviewing he or her about things like their judicial philosophy, past rulings or opinions, and ideas about certain areas of Law;

As part of this process, the committee sends a blue slip to senators from the home state in which the judicial election was received, allowing them to indicate whether or not they approve of the candidate

4. After the hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote to approve or return the candidate;

If approved, the candidate is voted on by the full Senate.
If the Committee votes to return the candidate to the president, the president has the opportunity to re-nominate the individual.

5. The Senate holds a vote on the candidate.

If the Senate confirms the nomination, the nominee receives a commission to serve a lifelong position as a Federal Judge.
If the Senate does not confirm the nomination, that candidate does not become a judge.

Cheers!

Liula [17]2 years ago

5 0

Answer:

Explained Below

Explanation:

Federal judges serve at Supreme Court, court of appeals and district courts. They are nominated by the President of United States after the confirmation by Senate. They can serve lifetime and cannot be removed as long as they exhibit good conduct upholding the values enshrined in the Constitution.

Steps to appoint Federal Judges:

1) The candidate is nominated for the judicial seat by President.

2) The nominee is required to fill a questionnaire which is then reviewed by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

3) Post reviewing of the nomination, The Senate Judiciary Committee calls for a hearing. The nominee is then questioned about their judicial philosophy or opinions.

4) The Senate Judiciary Committee then votes for approval or rejection of the nominee.

5) If the Senate confirms the nomination, the nominee is then appointed as a federal judge for a lifelong term.

You might be interested in

True or False: All government exists to control the legitimate exercise of power.

natka813 [3]

Answer:True

Explanation:

5 0

3 years ago

What does it mean by you have the right to remain silent

Anna11 [10]

It means be quiet or shut up

5 0

3 years ago

Read 2 more answers

The SABC implements a "no

qaws [65]

Answer:

work no pay rule. The CFO takes the decision to withhold payments.

3 0

2 years ago

Please write a paragraph describing your opinion on Natural Law and Legal Positivism.

evablogger [386]

The positivist thesis does not say that law’s merits are unintelligible, unimportant, or peripheral to the philosophy of law. It says that they do not determine whether laws or legal systems exist. Whether a society has a legal system depends on the presence of certain structures of governance, not on the extent to which it satisfies ideals of justice, democracy, or the rule of law. What laws are in force in that system depends on what social standards its officials recognize as authoritative; for example, legislative enactments, judicial decisions, or social customs. The fact that a policy would be just, wise, efficient, or prudent is never sufficient reason for thinking that it is actually the law, and the fact that it is unjust, unwise, inefficient or imprudent is never sufficient reason for doubting it. According to positivism, law is a matter of what has been posited (ordered, decided, practiced, tolerated, etc.). Austin thought the thesis “simple and glaring”. While it is probably the dominant view among analytically inclined philosophers of law, it is also the subject of competing interpretations together with persistent criticisms and misunderstandings.

7 0

2 years ago

Which of the following groups was the last to receive their right to vote?

Svet_ta [14]

Answer:

18 year old citizens

Explanation:

Democracy can be defined as a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

There are two (2) main types of democracy and these include;

I. Representative democracy: it's also known as indirect democracy and can be defined as a form of government which typically involves the process of having the citizens of a particular country vote to elect representatives (political leaders) to enact laws, create policies and make decisions on their behalf.

II. Direct democracy: it can be defined as a process which typically involves the candidates voting for their preferred choice. Thus, their choices are reflected directly on the subject matter.

In the United States of America, the eighteen (18) year old citizens were the last to receive their right to vote. This right was established by the 26th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

The 26th Amendment was proposed by the US Congress on the 23rd of March, 1971 and ratified on the 1st of July, 1971 by three-fourths of the states to become part of the Constitution of the United States of America.

7 0

3 years ago