00:01
The process of confirming federal judicial appointments has become especially contentious over the past few decades.
00:06
Do you think this is a result of the expanded role that courts play in political decisions, a change in the nature of contemporary political disclosure, both or something else entirely? at the end of the day, it is likely that this reality will ever change, or do both sides of the partition and ideological spectrum have too much to gain from keeping the process contentious? what consequences do you think that this change has on our political system? courts play an expanded role in political decisions and a change in the nature of contemporary political discourse also occurs.
00:40
One issue is political dishonesty of federal judges.
00:45
An example of this involves the seating of federal judges that goes undetected by the general public.
00:52
And this can be seen in the diaries of the late supreme court justice thurgood marshall.
00:57
Before becoming a federal circuit court judge in 1961, he was actually an fbi, mole inside the naacp while utilizes one of the organization's attorneys and openly criticizing the agency.
01:10
As a transparently duplicous act, justice marshall continued to openly criticize the fbi after his appointment to the federal judiciary.
01:19
Another example of the issues that occur include backroom cronyism.
01:25
So like backroom deals where maybe we have unqualified candidates, which we're going to see in this example.
01:30
Justice william o.
01:31
Douglas is seating to the supreme court.
01:33
Court occurred in 1939.
01:36
William o.
01:37
Douglas was so all -around connected that without any prior judicial experience, at the age of 40, he went from being the presidentially appointed chairman of secretary and exchange commission...