Confirmation Hearing: Emsworth (Chief Justice)

[Q]

I hereby call this hearing to order.

[Јas]

I believe that this is a very sensible appointment of a highly qualified candidate. I thus have no issues of concern and look forward to what I expect shall be a solid confirmation and term on the bench.

[MasterJedi]

You are truly qualified for being Cheif Justice Emsworth, you definitly have my vote.

[adam]

I have no questions, you have my vote.

[WMS]

I have a question for you, and one brought up by a post of the President that nominated you, no less.

What is your opinion on this ruling?

[Emsworth]

What is your opinion on this ruling?

I agree with certain parts of the ruling.

The original Constitution required that "No Law requiring any action to be taken or not taken by a Region shall be passed, except to preserve the rights of the Senate or of the People enumerated in the Constitution." The Unwed and Teenage Mothers Protection Act, however, regulated the manner in which the funds of state governments (which, in Atlasia, are extensions of regional governments) were to be spent. Every reasonable judge, whether liberal or conservative, would have to admit that the right to welfare benefits is not enumerated in the Constitution. Thus, every reasonable judge, liberal or conservative, would have to admit that this part of the law was unconstitutional.

The remainder of the case is not as clear-cut. The Court's interpretation of the enumerated powers of the Senate appears to be reasonable, but its interpretation of the equal protection clause could certainly be reconsidered.

[WMS]

What is your opinion on this ruling?

I agree with certain parts of the ruling.

The original Constitution required that "No Law requiring any action to be taken or not taken by a Region shall be passed, except to preserve the rights of the Senate or of the People enumerated in the Constitution." The Unwed and Teenage Mothers Protection Act, however, regulated the manner in which the funds of state governments (which, in Atlasia, are extensions of regional governments) were to be spent. Every reasonable judge, whether liberal or conservative, would have to admit that the right to welfare benefits is not enumerated in the Constitution. Thus, every reasonable judge, liberal or conservative, would have to admit that this part of the law was unconstitutional.

The remainder of the case is not as clear-cut. The Court's interpretation of the enumerated powers of the Senate appears to be reasonable, but its interpretation of the equal protection clause could certainly be reconsidered.

I thank for the nominee for his quick and concise answer.

On the issue of federalism, I tend to agree with you under the old Consititution. And of course I agree that the interpretation of the equal protection clause is suspect, although I suspect I feel it is suspect even more strongly than you.

And now that you've been given electric shocks to recover from me agreeing with you another question, and I'm not being hostile here:

This part of the decision:
Clause 17 says “to provide for systems of Insurance and Annuity for Unemployment, Disability, and Retirement.”  We find that this clause is clearly intended to apply to Unemployment benefits, Disability benefits, and retirement programs such as Social Security.  We do not view pregnancy and childbirth as a disability.

Is this the part dealing with "The Court's interpretation of the enumerated powers of the Senate" as you stated above? I'm a bit unclear on that.

[Emsworth]

This part of the decision:
Clause 17 says “to provide for systems of Insurance and Annuity for Unemployment, Disability, and Retirement.”  We find that this clause is clearly intended to apply to Unemployment benefits, Disability benefits, and retirement programs such as Social Security.  We do not view pregnancy and childbirth as a disability.

Is this the part dealing with "The Court's interpretation of the enumerated powers of the Senate" as you stated above?

Yes, that's right.

On the one hand, it is true that pregnancy and childbirth are not forms of unemployment, disability, or retirement. On the other hand, it is also true that pregnancy and childbirth can lead to temporary unemployment. (A mother might be unable to work because she must care for her newborn children.) Thus, the interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court is reasonable, the opposite interpretation is not necessarily incorrect.

[Democratic Hawk]

In my political life, I have made no secret of the fact that I do harbor deep misgivings about judicial nominees being on the Supreme Court who I feel are too ideological be they liberal, libertarian, populist or conservative because I oppose judicial activism in any shape or form and suspect they might be prone to it

As I have already stated it is my intention not to vote to confirm Associate Justice-designate TexasGurl but not for reasons of political ideology, more a question of temperance or lack of it

However, I do not share the same doubts with Chief Justice-designate Emsworth. The fact he and I don't see eye to eye on many issues does not, nor should not, even come into the equation when considering whether to vote to confirm him or not

Given that I genuinely do feel that Emsworth is a dignified fellow worthy of the being the Chief Justice of the Atlasian Supreme Court, who will show good temperament in exercising his duties and in making his rulings, it is my intention to vote to confirm him

'Hawk'

[WMS]

This part of the decision:
Clause 17 says “to provide for systems of Insurance and Annuity for Unemployment, Disability, and Retirement.”  We find that this clause is clearly intended to apply to Unemployment benefits, Disability benefits, and retirement programs such as Social Security.  We do not view pregnancy and childbirth as a disability.

Is this the part dealing with "The Court's interpretation of the enumerated powers of the Senate" as you stated above?

Yes, that's right.

On the one hand, it is true that pregnancy and childbirth are not forms of unemployment, disability, or retirement. On the other hand, it is also true that pregnancy and childbirth can lead to temporary unemployment. (A mother might be unable to work because she must care for her newborn children.) Thus, the interpretation adopted by the Supreme Court is reasonable, the opposite interpretation is not necessarily incorrect.

Now isn't that interesting.

I thank the honorable nominee for his time.

[jerusalemcar5]

Political ideology does not equate to judicial activism.  I think "judicial activism"  is the term used by people to slander judges who make decisions that people don't like.  Though I disagree with Emsworth on some issues and cases I always respect them. 

I whole heartedly support this nomination as well.

[MasterJedi]

I hereby open up the confirmation vote on Emsworth for Chief Justice. Please vote Aye, Nay or Abstain.

[MasterJedi]

Aye

[Virginian87]

Aye.

[WMS]

Aye.

[Јas]

Aye

[jerusalemcar5]

Aye.

[Democratic Hawk]

Aye

'Hawk'

[ilikeverin]

Yup

[adam]

Aye.

[Hatman 🍁]

Aye

[MasterJedi]

This nomination has enough votes to pass. Senators now have 24 hours to change their votes.

[MasterJedi]

With 9 Ayes, 0 Nays and 0 Abstentions Emsworth has been confirmed as Chief Justice.

[Emsworth]

I thank President Ebowed for appointing me, and the Senate for confirming the nomination.