Judicial Moderate
A moderate judicial philosophy is not as easily defined as judicially conservative and liberal philosophies are. It is usually composed of a balance between particular conservative and liberal beliefs. Frequently, judicial moderates are pegged as such because they will vote in a conservative manner on some issues, but vote in a liberal manner on others. This can make a judicial moderate the swing vote in certain cases depending on which legal issue is being decided. On the other hand, some judicial moderates are pegged as such simply because they will reverse their own prior decisions.
On the appellate level, some jurists are known as judicial moderates because they concentrate on evaluating the law based on wording and past legal precedent (stare decisis) rather than upon a consideration of outside factors such as religious beliefs or public opinion. Supreme Court justices, however, are less likely to be defined as moderates for the same reason because there is not the same mandate for them to follow stare decisis. As members of the highest court in the land, they can vote to overturn legal precedents and do not have to follow stare decisis if they find such action warranted.
In the case of judicial nominees with no prior judicial experience, some are called moderates because they lack a distinctive past with which to evaluate their future performance as jurists.
Prominent Judicial Moderates include:
- Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy
- Former Associate Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
Read more about this topic: Judicial Philosophy
Famous quotes containing the words judicial and/or moderate:
“Scarcely any political question arises in the United States that is not resolved, sooner or later, into a judicial question.”
—Alexis de Tocqueville (1805–1859)
“Tell a man whose house is on fire to give a moderate alarm; tell him to moderately rescue his wife from the hands of the ravisher; tell the mother to gradually extricate her babe from the fire into which it has fallen; but urge me not to use moderation in a case like the present.”
—William Lloyd Garrison (1805–1879)