Standing to sue, case or controversy, advisory opinion, political question, and many other maxims of judicial selfrestraint are functional mechanisms and manifestations of the will of judges and justices to limit the scope of judicial review and of the desire to reign in their own ideological impulses. [...] how should senators approach the task of learning about the judicial philosophies of the nominees? I must admit that it is easy for me to agree with Eisgruber's answers because they are similar to the appraisal that I gave in Judicature in the early 1990s (see "The Senate's confirmation role in Supreme Court nominations and the politics of ideology versus impartiality," August-September, 1991).
Pages to are hidden for
"Is there a better way?"Please download to view full document