The Supreme Court was established in 1789 as the third branch of government, in part to provide a third leg in the need for “checks and balances” against government overreach. But to me its primary role is to protect the rights of all, and I mean all, citizens of America. They are not there to protect or promote the rights of just those of their ethnicity, or their religious persuasion, nor are they there to implement the platform of any political party or social group. If we are wise enough to select the most qualified and the most patriotic candidates, makeup of the court need not be proportional, should not be established on a quota basis and does not need to “look like the face of America.” I would be content with an all-Black or all-Latino or all-women court that possessed the requisite legal credentials and a demonstrated passion for the interests and welfare of all Americans. (I don’t mean to object to, nor endorse, Ketanji Jackson who seems to have impressive qualifications)
Judges are appointed by the sitting president and confirmed by the Senate. They serve for life and have no need to seek the endorsement or approval of any one, any party or any group. If true to this calling they must conform to the constitution, divine the intentions of the founding fathers as best they can and pursue the best interest of the nation. The nation is all of us whatever our color or creed or persuasion. A supreme court justice answers only to the constitution and to his or her own conscience. Appointments to the court are probably the single most important and consequential decision to be made in safeguarding the rights of all Americans. We have to get it right every time.
—- Just the view of a common man
Views of a Common Man 
Ollie’s comments on SCOTUS and its role to protect the rights of all its citizens are well-stated. We should recognize that generations of justices have kept our Constitution a vital, creative instrument. They are required to preserve their authority by building a body of law linking each new decision to this 1787 sacred document, while still meeting the new realities and changing needs of later years. Transformation by interpretation is a major theme in the story of both the Supreme Court and the American people.
Archibald Cox was a leading authority on constitutional law and labor law. In 1973 he became the first Watergate Special Prosecutor. In his book, The Court and The Constitution, he states that “our devotion to the Constitution and the rule of law are because the Framers had the genius to say enough but not too much when they outlined a unique federal form of government which, through amendments, identified the basic individual rights they wished to guarantee against government oppression”.
Despite the tremendous changes in every aspect of our American life, the original Constitution still serves us well. It provides a method of judicial interpretation for both change and continuity. The criteria for nominating justices, therefore, should not be based on that nominee’s race, gender, or politics. It is distressing to see increasingly partisan battles over Supreme Court nominees in recent years.
The British philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead, attributes our freedom and the success of the American people to our constitutionalism and the belief in law which require an extraordinary degree of tolerance and cooperation.
LikeLike
Well said.
LikeLike