CONFIRMATION HEARING: Torie for Supreme Court Justice (Confirmed)

[Torie]

Hello all. I am honored to have been nominated by your President for this high ranking position, which requires a lot of trust to be effective. And thank you Mr. President for your vesting of such a high level of confidence in me.

The strict construction versus activist Manichean divide, I find somewhat but not wholly false. It depends on the issue. Sometimes the text is vague, and more policy driven written in broad brush strokes, just inviting current sensibilities to come in play, sometimes the text is that way by design (the "cruel and unusual" standard used in the other place I believe is intended to reflect modern sensibilities as to what is cruel and unusual, and that most probably was the original intent, so one on that one could be characterized as at once activist and strict constructionist), and other times it is all about text. My personal views on policy should not have much impact, except to the extent it is focused on what might work, and what might not, from the standpoint of legal mechanics.

My relative lack of knowledge about Atlasia law and lore is a disadvantage. But I am not afraid to ask a lot of questions, and as to the litigation process, I plan to invite "oral" argument where there can be a back and forth exchange. I would make the process more formal and procedurally driven, with a predictable process, and time lines and deadlines. I would also invite and encourage amicus briefs. In reality, this position, sort of combines trial and appellate court responsibilities, so the procedures used need to take cognizance of that.

The model justice works hard, both at understanding the law, and the facts in play, and how the law as a whole will function given evolving precedents, and has a calm and dispassionate temperament, to wit a judicial temperament. Over time, I think I have moved in the right direction vis a vis bringing those qualities to bear in jurisprudential tasks.  

Thank you for taking the time to pose questions to me. I look forward to more, and hey, maybe the content of the questions, and the back and forth, might influence how I would proceed if so honored to be confirmed by you.

[Torie]

In your opinion, if a precedent expected to be applied in a present case, is itself out of line with the Constitution and/or prior precedent to it, would it be "activist" to overturn said flawed precedent?

Precedent is stronger for non Constitutional issues, inasmuch as no supra majority is required to reverse a judicial statutory precedent deemed to be erroneous. Precedent is more likely to buttress previous errant decisions to the point where they will stand, where reversing course would cause substantial disruption in either the political or economic sphere, e.g, due to the public square having come to rely on the precedent. And of course, precedent is weakest where the errant holding shocks the conscience, as for example the embracing in the other place in the 19th century of the separate but equal doctrine.

[Torie]

How would you have ruled in the case Atlasia v Xahar?

I concur with the decision of the Court. One claim became moot when Xahar resigned, and the closing off of the vote in short order without notice raises due process issues and an issue of reasonableness, and while courts give deference to other branches when it comes to exercising discretion, that deference is not unlimited. Although not raised in argument, there may also have been quorum issues since only two of the local council voted.

[Torie]

I am very pleased with this nominee's qualifications and look forwarding to voting to confirm him.

Thank you Senator. I appreciate your reposing such confidence in me, and hopefully if confirmed, such confidence will prove to have been justified.

[Torie]

Prior to the assassination of Senior Associate Justice opebo, he authored a landmark dissent in which he found that the ideologues ruling the Court at the time were entirely out of their bounds on the basis of which they struck down a law related to the treatment of minorities.  These same ideologues went on to severely narrow the scope within which cases could be accepted by the Supreme Court on the basis of unconstitutionally created guidelines relating to a fictional 'standing', later rescinded by a new bench.  Would you revisit the opinions of your predecessor, and if so, why?

I would have upheld the Constitutionality of the Act as well within the powers of the government to protect the health and safety of minors. If it went beyond minors, then there is a free speech and right of association issue, but for minors, those rights are more truncated, and legislation circumscribing such rights on health and safety grounds I believe to be Constitutional when balancing off the two and sometimes competing considerations.

[Torie]

How long do you see yourself serving as a judge?

Indefinitely, and for so long as I believe that I am discharging my duties at the standard that I demand of myself, but probably not as long as opebo.

[Torie]

Thank you for the vote, and confirmation, Senators. For those who disapproved, hopefully I will prove able to mitigate the concerns which you expressed through diligent study. Heck, I did read the Atlasian Constitution in its entirety in connection with the Nix chapter of this matter, and found it well, to be interesting, not to mention sometimes challenging.

I assume someone will direct me what to do next, and that there is some interim step prior to my taking the oath of office.

Thanks again.