1. Political Polarization in the SCOTUS

2. The role of the justices
Appointed for life (can be impeached more on that later)
President has the power to nominate justices and other federal judges
Supreme Court is held for life to provide impartiality (no bias, well in a perfect world)
Traditionally the justices are confirmed by a senatorial majority

3. Chief Justice Roberts
The Chief Justice is responsible for presiding over all of the other justices.
Appointed by George W. Bush
Replaced Chief Justice William Rehnquist.
Confirmed as Chief Justice by a full Senate vote of 78–22.

4. Conclusions
The SCOTUS has become more politically polarized in recent times
The impartiality of the court has come into question as judges have ruled based on conservative/ liberal principles
The executive branch increasingly has been accused of using the SCOTUS to forward the agenda/ policy of the administration in power

5. Judicial Restraint vs. Activism
The belief that judges should always try to decide cases based on the basis of:
the original intent of those who wrote the Constitution
precedent or with previous decisions in similar cases
They say that elected legislators, not appointed judges, should make the law
Judicial Activism
The belief that judge should:
act more boldly and argue that the law should be interpreted and applied in the light of ongoing changes in conditions and values - (especially in cases involving civil rights and social welfare issues)

6. The nomination/confirmation process used to be seamless
Remember this chart! For the most part senators confirmed justices by an overwhelming majorities!

7. But there were some early rejections!

8. Reject #1: Robert Bork
President Ronald Reagan nominated Robert Bork to the Supreme Court.
Bork was a controversial pick because he fired the special prosecutor during Nixon’s Administration.
The U.S. Senate, with 54 Democrats, rejected his nomination, 42–58.

9. Almost Reject #2: Clarence Thomas
President George HW Bush nominated Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.
Thomas was accused of sexual misconduct by Anita Hill and his confirmation was mired in controversy.
The Senate confirmed the nomination by

10. Reject #3: Harriet Miers
President George W. Bush nominated Harriet Miers who was a Republican lawyer and former White House Counsel Supreme Court to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, but bipartisan opposition (she lacked experience) led President Bush to withdraw the nomination.

11. A turning point
The nomination process became more contentious after Bush v. Gore (2000)

12. Case Study 1: Merrick Garland
The Republican controlled Senate refused to confirm Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court (despite the fact that Garland previously held bipartisan support as a worthy appointment to this post).
The Republicans deemed President Obama a lame duck and wished to fill the position after the 2016 election.

13. Brett Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh was accused of sexual misconduct by several women but was ultimately appointed to the SCOTUS by the Republican majority in the Senate.

14. Provisional Conclusions
Judges historically have been white males from the Ivy League.
The Courts have become increasingly diverse in recent years.
Polarization has led to more nominees being rejected at the federal level.
SCOTUS justices are typically approved.
Confidence in SCOTUS declined abruptly after the Bush v. Gore decision.