As a Government major,  I was really excited to go to this Rose Cafe with Peter Enns, where he would lead a discussion on the current state of American politics. I think that the format of an open discussion encouraged inquiry on topics that Professor Enns might not normally talk about, but that he can respond to based on his wide knowledge of the subject matter. What I found particularly interesting was Professor Enns’ study and knowledge of the Supreme Court, because I find the Supreme Court fascinating. Something that the Professor mentioned was that, because of increased partisan alignment, the public is more and more capable of predicting Supreme Court decisions and votes based on who nominated the individual justices.

I am well aware of the hyper-partisan era we live in today, but observations like this one trouble me. The Supreme Court is an institution designed to be separate from both party and politics. The lifelong nature of the position of Supreme Court Justice was intended to isolate and protect the Justices from remaining dependent on the President who elected them or the party they belong to. Their job is to interpret the law. Not to interpret legality based on politics. If the Court was truly separate from the other branches of government, it would not be possible to predict which way a decision would fall based on party leanings or presidential nomination. Since this is clearly possible, our society is faced with the challenge of further isolating the highest court in the land. They should not be responsive to the President, nor public opinion, as these are subject to change based on a whim. The Court should be subject only to the law and its workings in our society. As such, we must find a way to preserve their independence, lest we risk losing our system of the separation of powers.