{"id":4134,"date":"2005-10-05T23:42:14","date_gmt":"2005-10-06T03:42:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2005\/10\/05\/supreme-court-sages-or-steel-"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:54:31","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:54:31","slug":"supreme-court-sages-or-steel-traps","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2005\/10\/05\/supreme-court-sages-or-steel-traps\/","title":{"rendered":"supreme court: sages or steel traps?"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

Show me a brilliant judge whose philosophy (of life, government or <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
baseball) <\/FONT>is the same at 60 or 70 as it was at 20 or 30, and I’ll<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
show <\/FONT>you a mind like a old steel trap — so rusty it’s often useless <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
or <\/FONT>dangerous.  That’s why I worry when told that a nominee to the <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Supreme Court “won’t get there and change his mind.”  For my <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
money, an ideologue who has all the answers from the first day <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
her butt hits the bench — not learning from the perspectives of others <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
or the lessons of unanticipated situations, facts, and consequences — <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
does not, by definition, have an appropriate judicial temperament. <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny And, that’s true even if the nominee<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
appears today to share all of my political and <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ethical beliefs.  (There’s no way, for instance,<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that I would want the person I was ten or twenty<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
years ago making all of my decisions today.)<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
\"eyesN\"  In a post<\/A> last June, “<\/FONT>political maturation after age 30<\/FONT>“,  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
I gave a 21st Century version of the old saw about<\/FONT> the worldviews of <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
those under 30 and over 40 (which is often incorrectly<\/FONT><\/A> attributed <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to <\/FONT><\/FONT>Winston Churchill).<\/FONT> <\/FONT> It tweaks conservatives by saying <\/FONT><\/FONT>that <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
anyone over 50 whose heart, mind and eyes<\/EM> are still working <\/FONT>is <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a “thoughtful liberal”.  The main point, however, is not the tilt of <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
one’s resultant politics.  The crux can be summarized <\/FONT>in two <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
sentences: <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
I refuse to believe that personal or political maturation <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ends at 30.<\/FONT> <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n
Whatever the conditions in other times and societies<\/FONT>, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
our <\/FONT>stable, affluent <\/FONT>and open society permits — <\/FONT>and <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
responsible citizenship <\/FONT><\/FONT>demands<\/EM> <\/FONT>— that each individual <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
continue <\/FONT>to learn and grow through <\/FONT>successive decades, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
letting <\/FONT><\/FONT>experience <\/FONT>and wisdom remove the <\/FONT>blinders <\/FONT>of <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ideology and <\/EM><\/FONT>radicalism.<\/EM>  <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/FONT><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
In contrast, Pres. Bush declared<\/A> on Tuesday:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“I’m interested in finding somebody who shares my philos-<\/FONT>
\n
ophy today, and will have that same philosophy 20 years <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
from <\/FONT><\/FONT>now…That’s the way Harriet Miers…is.”<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
To use a mandatory sports metaphor (but, unlike Bainbridge<\/FONT><\/A>  “BBallGuys”<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and <\/FONT>Beldar<\/FONT><\/A>, eschewing baseball) the very best NBA and NFL <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
coaches do a lot<\/EM> of learning and adjusting over the years. They <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
don’t bring their college playbooks and stick to them come hell <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
or highwater. <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Bocce<\/FONT><\/A> might make a better analogy: near-perfect physical <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
shape is not required to be world-class; strategy and finesse <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
are what count the most.  It’s the wrinkled old-timers, not their <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
grandkids, who are smiling at the end of almost every game. <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“BainbridgePix”  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Professor Bainbridge<\/FONT><\/A> wants Pres. George W. Bush to <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
nominate <\/FONT>“a young, committed movement <\/FONT>conservative <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
possessing one <\/FONT>of the greatest legal minds of his\/<\/FONT>her <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
generation.”  Steve thinks <\/FONT>that will guarantee the sort <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of <\/FONT>decisions that he wishes the Court would make<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
today.  But, if that great legal mind <\/EM>is both<\/EM> brilliant and<\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
wise, we shouldn’t be able to precisely predict outcomes <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
over the course of the justice’s service on the Supreme <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Court.  <\/FONT>And, if Prof. B is both brilliant and wise, his idea <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the <\/FONT>perfect result will also change over the next couple <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of <\/FONT>decades.  <\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
No ideology has all the answers.  Sometimes, really smart people<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
(and really dull ones) think that they do.   Elders get wise by <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
learning, observing, listening — not<\/EM> by sticking to the dogma <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
or prejudices of their youth and merely getting old.  We deserve <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Supreme Court justices who are sages, not just steel traps.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny By the way, none of the above means that<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
I endorse Harriet Miers. (see prior post<\/A>)<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
update<\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/EM> (Oct. 6, 2005): Please see Lyle Denniston’s excellent Commentary <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
at <\/FONT>SCOTUSblog<\/EM>, “Mortgaging Miers’ future<\/A>” (Oct. 5, 2005).  He argues <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“To demonstrate that ability [to be her own person], she has <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to contradict the President’s firm declaration that her philosophy <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the law will remain locked fordecades in the time capsule <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the Bush presidency. If the President is right about her, she <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
could be reminded, no change in political, social, cultural or <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
economic circumstances, however radical, could move her to <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
rethink constitutional dogma.”<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n
Denniston quotes from Pres. Bush’s <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>press conference on Oct. 4: “closedSmn”<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“I know her well enough to be able to say that she’s not <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
going to change, that 20 years from now she’ll be the same <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
person with the same philosophy that she is today. She’ll <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
have more experience, she’ll have been a judge, but, never-<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
theless, her philosophy won’t change. And that’s important <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to me…I don’t want to put somebody on the bench who is <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
this way today, and changes. That’s not what I’m interested <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in. I’m interested in finding somebody who shares my philos-<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ophy today, and will have that same philosophy 20 years from <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
now…That’s the way Harriet Miers…is.”<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Denniston notes: <\/FONT>“It is very easy to recall Justices who changed during <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
their service on <\/FONT>the Court. . . . To mention just a few: the first (and the <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
second) John <\/FONT>Marshall Harlan, Chief Justice Earl Warren, Justice Owen <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Roberts — <\/FONT>and, of course, Justice Jackson,” He concludes:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“If President Bush knows, with confidence, that a Justice <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Miers would never adapt in that way, he has put her on the <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
defensive on the first day after she was chosen, and perhaps <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
for the balance of any years she would spend as a Justice.”<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n