What would you like to do?
Has any US Supreme Court Justice ever been elected President of the US?
William Howard Taft was elected President in 1908, and served a single term in the White House, from 1909-1913. He was later appointed Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, which he presided over from 1921 until 1930.
Taft is the only person who was both President and Chief Justice of the United States.
Taft is the only person who was both President and Chief Justice of the United States.
7 people found this useful
Was this answer useful?
Thanks for the feedback!
No. President Andrew Johnson nominated Henry Stanbery to the seat vacated by John Catron, after Catron's death in 1865. The Senate tabled the nomination, then eliminated C…atron's former position on the bench, leaving the Supreme Court with eight justices, in order to prevent Johnson from appointing a someone to the Court. Johnson was a Democrat from the Confederate state of Tennessee. He himself opposed secession, thus Lincoln placed him on the Presidential ticket in 1864.
Not while he (or she) is in office, but after his term of office expires, yes. Only one former US President has gone on to serve on the Supreme Court: William Howard Taft was …Chief Justice from 1921-1930. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Sonia Sotomayor Yes. On May 26, 2009, President Obama nominated Justice Sonia Sotomayor to replace Justice David H. Souter, who retired at the end of June 2009. On August 6…, 2009, the US Senate confirmed Sotomayor's nomination by a vote of 68-31, making her the 111th US Supreme Court Justice. Although the vote was split along party lines, the unanimous Democratic endorsement was joined by nine Republicans and both Senate Independents. Associate Justice Sotomayor took the Constitutional and Judicial Oaths of Office on August 8, 2009. Elena Kagan President Obama nominated US Solicitor General Elena Kagan on May 9, 2010, to succeed Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, who retired from the Court on June 29. The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended Kagan's by a vote of 13-6; she was confirmed by a full Senate vote of 63-37 on Thursday, August 5, 2010. Kagan, who is the fourth woman to join the US Supreme Court, will also increase the female census on the bench to three for the first time in history. She is expected to take the Oaths of Office on August 7, 2010.
Supreme court justices are not elected. They are nominated by the president and confirmed by the senate. The Supreme Court Justices serve for life, or until they resign. … It is important that they are not elected because this protects them from being swayed by a temporary majority.
Yes and no. The only justice ever removed involuntarily from the Supreme Court was John Rutledge, whose recess appointment (an appointment where the "advice and consent" of th…e Senate is deferred until the next session) as Chief Justice was rejected because the Senate was concerned about his mental status. He officially served only from July 1, 1795 - December 28, 1795. Supreme Court justices can also be impeached, if they commit "high crimes and misdemeanors," which would include any serious legal infraction (not traffic tickets) or ethics violation. Impeachment is a two-step process; the impeachment phase is similar to a Grand Jury hearing, where charges (called "articles of impeachment") are presented and the House of Representatives determines whether the evidence is sufficient to warrant a trial. If the House vote passes by a simple majority, the defendant is "impeached," and proceeds to trial in the Senate. The Senate trial, while analogous to a criminal trial, only convenes for the purpose of determining whether a Justice (or other officeholder) should be removed from office on the basis of the evidence presented at impeachment. The Senate must return a 2/3 Super Majority for conviction. Only one Supreme Court Justice, Samuel Chase (one of the signatories to the Declaration of Independence), has ever been impeached. The House of Representatives accused Chase of letting his Federalist political leanings affect his rulings, and served him with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804. The Senate acquitted him of all charges in 1805, establishing the right of the judiciary to independent opinion. Chase continued on the Court until his death in June 1811. Abe Fortas, who served on the Supreme Court from 1965-1969, was almost impeached due to a tax and financial scandal involving Wall Street financier, Louis Wolfson. Fortas was a Lyndon Johnson appointment. When the new President, Richard Nixon, learned of the scandal, he reportedly said Fortas should be "off of there," referring to the Supreme Court. The House of Representatives had already taken preliminary steps toward impeachment. Chief Justice Earl Warren urged Justice Fortas to resign, to save the reputation of the Court. Fortas resisted at first, but eventually told other members of the Court he was stepping down to avoid damaging his wife's legal career. Later, he admitted another reason for leaving the Court was to save his friend, William O. Douglas, who was also under investigation for judicial impropriety. The House of Representatives finally concluded Douglas had committed no impeachable offenses and dropped the investigation.
No federal official can hold two positions at the same time. The President can become Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court after his (or her) administration has ended, or can… become President after serving as Chief Justice. William Howard Taft is an example of a President who later became Chief Justice. Taft was in the White House from 1909-1913, and presided over the Supreme Court from 1921-1930.
US Supreme Court justices are not elected, they are appointed by the President with the approval of the Senate.
Yes. Justice Samuel Chase was impeached by the House of Representatives in 1804, but was acquitted at his Senate trial in early 1805. Chase is the only US Supreme Court justic…e to have been impeached, but a few have had close calls. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
Yes. Sixteen justices have resigned from the Court since it was established in 1789. In the early years, the most common reason for resignation was the rigorous circuit riding… schedule that forced the justices to travel long distances, on horseback or by carriage, most of the year. John Jay, the first Chief Justice, resigned after being elected Governor of New York. After Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1869 that had a provision for retirement pay, more justices retired than resigned. Still, other justices continued to leave the Court due to illness, dislike of the work, or conflicts of interest. The following list shows which justices resigned in order of appointment, and includes the years served as well as the appointing President. 1.........John Jay, (CJ)..................1789 - 1795........Washington 4.........John Blair, Jr....................1790 - 1795........Washington 5.........John Rutledge..................1790 - 1791........Washington 7.........Thomas Johnson..............1792 - 1793........Washington 32.......Benjamin R. Curtis............1857 - 1857........Filmore 33.......John Archibald Campbell....1853 - 1861........Pierce 37........David David....................1862 - 1877........Lincoln 62.......Charles Evans Hughes.......1910 - 1916........Taft 65.......Mahlon Pitney...................1912 - 1922........Taft 68.......John Hessein Clark............1916 - 1922........Wilson 69.......William H. Taft (CJ)...........1921 - 1930.........Harding 74.......Owen Roberts...................1930 - 1945........Hoover 81.......James F. Byrnes................1941 - 1942........Roosevelt 91.......Charles Evans Whittaker.....1957 - 1962.........Eisenhower 94.......Arthur Goldburg................1962 - 1965.........Kennedy 95........Abe Fortas.......................1965 - 1969.........Johnson
Yes. Unlike its requirement that the President be a "natural born" citizen, and the Senators and Representatives be at least "naturalized," the Constitution is silent on the c…itizenship and residency requirements for a Supreme Court Justice. Six Supreme Court justices were born outside the United States; however, only two listed* would be considered naturalized citizens under the laws operating at the time. James Wilson..........1789-1798.......(Scotland) James Iredell..........1790-1799.......(England) William Paterson......1793-1806.......(Ireland) David Brewer...........1889-1919........(Turkey) (born to American missionaries) George Sutherland...1922-1938.......(England)* Felix Frankfurter.......1939-1962.......(Austria)* George Sutherland George Sutherland was born in Buckinghamshire, England, in 1862, and emigrated to the United States with his parents in 1863. Sutherland attended the University of Michigan Law School, but left without earning a degree. He was admitted to the Michigan bar in 1883, then briefly entered private practice with his father, who had also become an attorney. Prior to joining the Supreme Court, Sutherland was a member of the House of Representatives (1901-1903) and US Senator from Utah (1905-1917). Warren Harding nominated Sutherland to the Supreme Court in September 1922. He was part of the ultra-conservative bloc of the Court, known collectively as the Four Horsemen, who opposed Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal legislation. Sutherland retired from the Court in 1938. Felix Frankfurter Felix Frankfurter (1882-1965), who was born in Austria and immigrated to America with his parents at the age of 12, graduated from Harvard Law School, and went on to become assistant to Henry Stimson (later Secretary of State under Hoover) as US Attorney for the Southern District of New York. He later followed Stimson to Washington when President Theodore Roosevelt appointed Stimson Secretary of War. Frankfurter was was a staunch supporter of Roosevelt, and worked on the "Bull Moose Campaign" of 1912, in an unsuccessful attempt to return Teddy to the Presidency after he lost the Republican nomination to William Howard Taft. After World War I, Frankfurter returned to Harvard as a Law Professor, where he remained until Franklin D. Roosevelt was elected in 1932. Frankfurter, an ardent supporter of President Roosevelt's New Deal, became a close and trusted advisor to the President. This lead to his nomination to the Supreme Court in 1939 (where he served until 1962). Although ideologically liberal, Frankfurter was the Court's most outspoken proponent of "judicial restraint," the belief that the Court should not interpret the law and Constitution in such as way as to place encumbering limits on the power of the Legislative and Executive branches. Although foreign-born, Frankfurter revered the Constitution and was considered extremely patriotic. Recent Supreme Court Hopefuls More recently, two-term Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, a naturalized citizen and Canadian by birth, was under consideration for nomination to the Supreme Court seat vacated by now-retired Justice David Souter, but her foreign birth (despite Canada being a neighboring country) became a major point of contention with political conservatives. You can draw several conclusions from this brief history: At present, Supreme Court Justices are most likely to be drawn from a pool of "natural born" citizens, but this is due to political considerations, rather than law. Naturalized citizens are eligible to serve on the Court. In order to become a naturalized citizen, a person must be at least 18 years old and must have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least five years, or for three years, if married to and continuously living with a spouse who's an American citizen. A person voluntarily serving in the US military is eligible to apply for citizenship after one year of service, or within six month of being honorably discharged. Non-citizen residents of the United States may or may not be legally eligible for a position on the Court, but politically, the likelihood of a non-citizen being nominated or confirmed by the Senate is virtually nil.
No one. US Supreme Court justices are not elected by popular vote; they are nominated by the President, then must be confirmed by a simple majority of the Senate. For more i…nformation, see Related Questions, below.
No. Article 2 Section 2 of the US Constitution provides that Supreme Court Justices are appointed by the President with the Advice and Consent of the Senate: [The President…] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments. US Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the current President, presented to the Senate Judiciary Committee for investigation, then accepted or rejected by the US Senate. If a nominee receives a simple majority (51) of the votes, then he or she is commissioned as a Supreme Court Justice. This is a lifetime appointment, and is served until such time as the Justice retires, resigns, dies or is impeached by the House of Representative and tried by the Senate. In some states, like North Carolina, voters elect state supreme court justices to a fixed term of office; in other states, justices are appointed by the state Governor or another legislative body. For more information, see Related Questions, below.
The Supreme Court can not elect a president. In 2000. the Supreme did rule against a Florida court case that demanded another recount of the presidential ballots and let stand…. the results certified by the Florida Secretary of State These electoral votes from Florida did tip the election to Bush. If the court had ruled in favor of another recount. nobody knows what the recount might have shown.
Because elected court justices are far more likely to fall under the influence of popular opinion; rule of law is what they are supposed to be ruling on. Beyond that, we want …the decisions of that court to be grounded in the Constitution, not in popular opinion. If Supreme Court justices were subject to election, then those who made unpopular but correct rulings would be subject to replacement. These are undoubtedly some of the problems the Framers anticipated when they wrote the Constitution. They were also careful to make sure neither the President nor Senate had complete control over the appointment process to discourage abuse of power and help maintain the independence of the Judicial Branch. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 "[The President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments." For more detail on this subject, see Related Questions, below.
All 112 justices in the history of the US Supreme Court (as of 2011) have been lawyers.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the US Constitution assigns the President power to nominate a Supreme Court justice with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. Appointment… to the Court is a shared power, not the President's alone. Although the Framers didn't explain their reasons for establishing this particular system, political expedience undoubtedly played a role. One person (the President), representing a single party (but mindful of the other party's political power), can make an informed choice fairly quickly. The Senate, on the other hand, with two parties fighting for control, could get bogged down in partisan politics and drag out selection for a long time. If the Senate only has one person to evaluate, their role becomes much simpler: investigate, evaluate, appoint or reject. This is a dramatic oversimplification of the appointment process, but the general reasoning seems sound. The shared power between Executive and Legislative branches is part of the US government's system of checks and balances that helps ensure no single branch becomes too powerful. Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 "[The President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments."
Not the whole Congress. There are nominated by the President and approved by the US Senate.