The supreme court should not be held as an end all

This preview shows page 2 - 3 out of 3 pages.

and which were made to further another’s agenda. The Supreme Court should not be held as an ‘end all’ entity. Their decisions should be open to appeal, like any other judicial process. Peopleare fallible, and situations change. There should also be set terms and required retirement ages established, for the same reasons as they are established elsewhere within the government.ReferencesCheeseman, H. R. (2017). Business Law, 8th Edition. [MBS Direct]. Retrieved from The Supreme Court’s action, or inaction, can cause ripples throughout our society. The power given to the Supreme Court, was done so, by the people. As we stated in our initial discussion, the life terms of the Justice’s and their ultimate power, can be concerning. This follow-on question can add fuel for either side of this debate. When the Supreme Court makes a ruling, there is no appeal. If they do not make a ruling, they send the issue back to the Appellate Courts, or dismiss it altogether. A positive outcome, if you sit back and think about it. If the court cannot come to a decision, they do not simply, “make a call”. As in the case, Zubik v.

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture