Question
Here is the question : WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED TO BECOME A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?
Option
Here is the option for the question :
- Must have formally studied law
- Must be at least 35 years old
- Must be born in the U.S.
- None of the above
The Answer:
And, the answer for the the question is :
Explanation:
The truth is, anyone can run for the Supreme Court; there are no prerequisites. A justice is nominated by the president and must be approved by the senate. James F. Byrnes (1941–1922) was the last Supreme Court justice to not have a legal education. He did not complete high school but did complete law school by the time he was 23.
The appointment of a Supreme Court justice is one of the most important and consequential decisions that a president of the United States can make. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and has the final say on some of the most contentious and divisive issues facing the country. However, despite the importance of this role, there are actually no formal requirements for becoming a Supreme Court justice.
Unlike other positions in government, such as the presidency or Congress, there are no specific qualifications or prerequisites for becoming a Supreme Court justice. The Constitution simply states that the president “shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint…Judges of the supreme Court.” This means that a person can be appointed to the Supreme Court without any prior legal experience, without a law degree, and without even being a citizen of the United States.
Of course, in practice, it is highly unlikely that someone without a legal background or significant experience in the legal field would be appointed to the Supreme Court. In fact, every Supreme Court justice in history has had some form of legal experience, either as a practicing attorney, a judge on a lower court, or both. Additionally, most Supreme Court justices have had a law degree from a prestigious law school.
However, these qualifications are not strictly necessary. For example, in 1967, President Lyndon B. Johnson nominated Thurgood Marshall to the Supreme Court. Marshall had never served as a judge before, and while he had a law degree, it was from a historically black law school that was not widely recognized at the time. Nevertheless, he was confirmed by the Senate and went on to become one of the most influential Supreme Court justices of the 20th century.
Similarly, in 2005, President George W. Bush nominated Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Miers had served as White House counsel and had been a practicing attorney for over 30 years, but she had never been a judge and had never argued a case before the Supreme Court. Her nomination was met with widespread opposition, and she ultimately withdrew her name from consideration.
The lack of formal requirements for becoming a Supreme Court justice is both a strength and a weakness of the American system of government. On the one hand, it allows for a wide range of perspectives and experiences to be represented on the Court. On the other hand, it means that the appointment of a Supreme Court justice can be highly politicized, with nominees often selected based on their perceived ideology rather than their qualifications or experience.
In recent years, the appointment process for Supreme Court justices has become increasingly contentious, with both parties accusing the other of playing politics with the Court. The confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh in 2018 was particularly fraught, with allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh dominating the confirmation p