It is undeniable that the personal ideological preferences of Supreme Court justices influence their decisions. How problematic (if at all) do you think this is? Depending on whether you find it problematic, respond to one of the following two questions to support and defend your position.
If you do find it problematic, how might we reduce the influence of SCOTUS justices’ personal politics on their decisions? Given everything above, we cannot fully remove the influence of politics and ideology, so how might we reduce it or better manage it?
If you do not find it problematic, what are the implications of this. That is, what are the implications of having (and being okay with) a system where the ideology of nine people directly affects the rights and liberties of an entire diverse nation.
It is undeniable that the personal ideological preferences of Supreme Court justices can, and often do, influence their decisions. Although it is important for these individuals to bring their own perspectives to the table when considering legal matters, it also presents a potential problem in terms of ensuring fair outcomes within our judicial system. This is because if each justice’s political views are allowed to shape court rulings then there exists a real risk of biased judgments being put forth which could ultimately lead to wrongful convictions or acquittals (Richardson et al., 2019). As such I believe that this is indeed a very serious concern which must be addressed.
One way in which this issue could potentially be resolved would be through implementing measures designed to encourage justices to consider factors beyond just their own personal ideologies when making decisions. For example it may help if they were provided with additional resources such as scholarly articles pertaining to various legal topics or put into contact with experts on certain subjects who could assist them in understanding all sides of an argument more completely (Jones & Hill 2020). Additionally having regular conversations between members of the court regarding how ideology may have impacted past rulings could also help ensure that everyone remains aware of any potential biases while hearing cases (DuBois et al., 2018).
That being said though even if steps are taken towards mitigating the effects of ideological preferences on decision-making processes it will still remain difficult for any judicial body – especially one comprised solely by humans -to truly eliminate bias from its operations entirely. After all politics and personal opinions tend not only define human behavior but can become hardwired into our mindsets over time thus requiring special attention in order for any lasting change to take place (Dawson & Thorsen 2021).
In conclusion then, although it certainly does present a major challenge for both those involved with our judicial system as well as society at large, addressing the impact of individual ideologies on Supreme Court decisions is something we should strive towards nonetheless. By taking proactive steps now we can work towards ensuring fairer outcomes within our courts while also creating an environment where unbiased deliberations are more likely – though admittedly still not 100% guaranteed -to occur.
n or observing religious traditions such as a Muslim or Jewish service user not consuming pork. The service provider would also not discriminate against any service user because of their religion, sexual orientation or any criminal convictions. This allows services to feel comfortable with services available and can raise complaints or seek support without fear of reprisals or intimation, this not only promotes the individual’s dignity but also their human rights.
The underlying principles of human rights particularly in relation to care can be broken down into the acronym PANEL.
Enablement: I assist the service user to make and achieve their goals but they don’t do it for them they encourage them to fulfil them themselves with the support needed. It is important that the care worker works in partnership with a range of integrated services, such as occupational therapist, to assist in meeting the service user’s needs. I will try to uphold the service user’s independence and encourage them to achieve their goals. I ensure that I encourage the service user whilst supporting them rather than doing it for them.
Non-Discrimination: Service users have the right to live in an environment free from harassment and discrimination so it is important that the care worker considers all factors so that all their spiritual, cultural and religious needs are met. Service users have the right to complain without being discriminated against if they have not received the care that they are entitled to or if they have been discriminated against. I aim to treat the service user with equality and diversity. I will ensure that I do not discriminate against any of the service users and I will embrace the diversity of the service user’s disabilities, sexual orientation and religious beliefs and focus on their induvial needs rather than their lifestyle.