Democrats Introduce Bill that Could Lead to Impeachment for Justices Thomas and Scalia

[JDPriestly]

58. Judges should be as neutral as possible.

They should isolate themselves from political pressure while serving on the bench.

That is difficult of course because judges are often appointed at least initially by the president or the government, and at that point their political and perhaps religious affiliations may be considered by the person or commission appointing them. The consideration of political and religious factors at that point may be taken for granted, never admitted or even subconscious, but they play a role in some or many cases.

It is also difficult at the state level because at least in California judges run for office. They don't run on a party ticket or declare their party necessarily, but they have to raise money and may seek political endorsements and campaign assistance from political organizations or organizers.

Members of the Supreme Court do not have these excuses for their sometimes blatant partisan activities.

The law and politics are closely intertwined. It might be difficult to determine whether a Justice is speaking to a social or political issue or perhaps speaking in support of a political party. It can be hard to decide sometimes.

That's one of the reasons we have the First Amendment. What is and is not political, what is and is not protected speech can be a matter of the views of the listeners.

But Supreme Court justices should not be involved in partisan politics because it destroys the appearance of neutrality.