A synthesis Paper that support lifetime tenure for US Supreme justices

User Generated

Novbyrxr

Humanities

Description

Thesis Statement

“While scholars have often argued the need to review the lifetime tenure of the Supreme Court justices in the United States (Hudson, 2017; Burbank, 2006; Shafritz, Lane, & Borick, 2005); I claim that the lifetime tenure is good for the system. The life tenure is required for the justice to enable the court to efficiently discharge its’ Constitution interpretation duty for the betterment of democracy. This argument originates out of the fact that creating term limits for the appointments could come with its associated problems.”

References

Burbank, S. (2006). Alternative career resolution II: Changing the tenure of Supreme Court Justices. University Of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(6), 1511-1550.

Hudson, W. E. (2017). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hamilton, A. (1778). The Federalist No. 78. In Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.), Classics of public policy (2005, pp. 285 – 290). New York, NY: Pearson Education.

Unformatted Attachment Preview

The synthesis paper will be based on the topics from week five to eight of the course. You will need to develop an argument or theory about one of these topics and then construct a 6 page paper (in APA format) using at least 6 of the course readings and 3 additional scholarly resources from the school Library to support your thesis. Week 5: The Courts and the Topography of Modern Public Policy ➢ State and Federal Courts ➢ Lifetime or Limited Terms? Week 6: Interest Groups in American Politics ➢ Interest Groups ➢ Citizen Participation Week 7: The “Fourth” Branch of Government: The Bureaucracy ➢ Federal Bureaucracy Week 8: Reporting, Analyzing, and Shaping Policy: The role of the Media ➢ Media and Public Policy Synthesis Paper Guidelines Synthesis means putting ideas from many sources together in one essay or presentation. After reading several articles and books, your task is to organize some of the information around a theme or a question, make generalizations, and then present information (statistics, quotes, examples) in a logical way to support your argument. Remind yourself that a synthesis is not a summary, a comparison, or a review. Rather, a synthesis is the result of an integration of what you heard/read and your ability to use this learning to develop and support a key thesis or argument. Instructions 1. Select a topic from the major topics covered in the assigned weeks; 2. Develop an argument, proposition, hypothesis, or theory. If you pose a question, present a tentative answer. Begin your paper with this argument, clearly outlining the ideas you will develop; 3. Identify at least six texts/articles, which you read in this class, and address the theme and/or question on which you chose to focus. Find an additional three scholarly resources (not course resources) to support your argument; 4. Read each of your sources carefully and summarize main ideas; 5. Analyze your sources to identify the similarities and differences, or group similar ideas together; generalizing from these similar ideas; 6. Assemble the various generalizations in a logical and coherent way; 7. Focus on the ideas, not the authors of those ideas (your essay should not sound like a list of unrelated ideas by unrelated people); 8. It is highly recommended that you use direct quotes when referring to texts, but make sure you situate your quotes and integrate them into the paper in terms of content and writing; 9. If your argument/question lends itself to this, you can present ideas and refute arguments that challenge them; 10. Whenever possible, make an effort to populate your paper with real-world examples, which support your overall argument; 11. In conclusion, you should summarize your main argument and outline questions that remain open or issues that ought to be further explored. In a 6-page paper, synthesize the major concepts of the assigned weeks. Your synthesis paper must demonstrate both breadth and depth of knowledge and critical thinking appropriate to graduate-level scholarship. It must follow APA Publication Manual guidelines and be free of typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors. Be sure to support your paper with specific references to all resources used in its preparation. Thesis Statement “While scholars have often argued the need to review the lifetime tenure of the Supreme Court justices in the United States (Hudson, 2017; Burbank, 2006; Shafritz, Lane, & Borick, 2005); I claim that the lifetime tenure is good for the system. The life tenure is required for the justice to enable the court to efficiently discharge its’ Constitution interpretation duty for the betterment of democracy. This argument originates out of the fact that creating term limits for the appointments could come with its associated problems.” References Burbank, S. (2006). Alternative career resolution II: Changing the tenure of Supreme Court Justices. University Of Pennsylvania Law Review, 154(6), 1511-1550. Hudson, W. E. (2017). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Himilton, A. (1778). The Federalist No. 78. In Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.), Classics of public policy (2005, pp. 285 – 290). New York, NY: Pearson Education. Week 5 Readings • Hudson, W. E. (2017). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. o Chapter 2, “The Second Challenge: The Imperial Judiciary” (pp. 65-101) • Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.). (2005). Classics of public policy. New York, NY: Pearson Education. o Chapter 8, “Policy Reviewing by the Judiciary” ▪ The Federalist No. 78 (1778) (pp. 285–290) ▪ Brown v. Board of Education (1954) (pp. 297–300) ▪ Miranda v. Arizona (1966) (pp. 302–309) • Cornell University Law School Legal Information Institute. (n.d.). LII collection: US Supreme Court decisions. Retrieved September 3, 2014, from http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/supremes.htm • Oyez, Inc. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.oyez.org/ • Supreme Court of the United States. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.supremecourt.gov/ Week 6 Readings • Hudson, W. E. (2017). American democracy in peril: Eight challenges to America’s future (8th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. o Chapter 4, “The Fourth Challenge: Citizen Participation” (pp. 137-170) • Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.). (2005). Classics of public policy. New York, NY: Pearson Education. o Chapter 3, “Interests Groups and Public Policy” ▪ The Governmental Process (1951) (pp. 83–87) o Chapter 4, “Agenda Setting” ▪ The Dynamics of Agenda-Building (1972) (pp. 128–136) • Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 35(4), 216–224. doi:10.1080/01944366908977225 Retrieved from the Library databases. Week 7 Readings • Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.). (2005). Classics of public policy. New York, NY: Pearson Education. o Chapter 2, “Public Policymaking” ▪ Street-Level Bureaucrats as Policy Makers (1980) (pp. 51–61) • Gedid, J. (2013). Administrative procedure for the twenty-first century: An introduction to the 2010 Model State Administrative Procedure Act. St. Mary’s Law Journal, 44(1), 241–280. Retrieved from the Library databases. • Moynihan, D. P. (2004). Protection versus flexibility: The Civil Service Reform Act, competing administrative doctrines, and the roots of contemporary public management debate. Journal of Policy History, 16(1), 1–33. Retrieved from the Library databases. • Türk, A. H. (2013). Oversight of administrative rulemaking: Judicial review. European Law Journal, 19(1), 126–142. doi:10.1111/eulj.12017. Retrieved from the Library databases. • Wilson, J. Q. (2012, spring). The bureaucracy problem. National Affairs, 11, 145–152. Retrieved from the Walden databases. Week 8 Readings • Shafritz, J. M., Lane, K. S., & Borick, C. P. (Eds.). (2005). Classics of public policy. New York, NY: Pearson Education. o Chapter 10, “Public Policy as Public Relations” ▪ The Image: A Guide to Pseudo-Events in America (1961) (pp. 369–374) • D’Agostino, M. J. (2011). Reviving democracy through new and traditional media. Public Administration Review, 71(2) 306–307. Retrieved from the Library databases. • Mutz, C. D. , & Martin, P. S. (2001). Facilitating communication across lines of political difference: The role of mass media. The American Political Science Review, 95(1) 97–114. Retrieved from the Library databases. Media • Putnam, D. (Producer). (2013). Does the media have a “duty of care”? Retrieved from http://www.ted.com/talks/david_puttnam_what_happens_when_the_media_s_priority_is_profi t.html
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Hi, I had not realized that the paper is six pages; I think that the price is too low for the work done; attached is paper, I would appreciate it if you found it in your heart to pay extra for the work done. Thank you

Outline
Lifetime Tenure for US Supreme Justices
Introduction
Body
Conclusion
References


Running Head: LIFETIME TENURE

1

Lifetime Tenure for US Supreme Justices
Institutional Affiliation
Name
Date

LIFETIME TENURE

2
Lifetime Tenure for US Supreme Justices

The Supreme Court justices in the United States happen to be part of the highest court in
the country, the Supreme Court. Their appointment is hence very crucial since they have the
power to declare the congressional law unconstitutional. Tasked with such responsibility, it is
therefore understandable why there selections are made by the president of the United States and
confirmed by the senate. By virtue of this appointment, the United States supreme justices are
entitled to a lifetime tenure basically a term of office where they are able to serve the office for
life unless the individual decides to resign or due to extraordinary circumstances. Supported by
the U.S. Constitution, Article III, and Section 1 that stipulates how the court justice is able to
hold the office under good behavior.
Hence ensuring integrity of the use of the power given to the justices. It is however
important to note that amidst the life tenure the supreme justices of the United Kingdom are
obliged to resign at the age of 70. Debates have been raised on whether the life tenure is really
necessary considering the problems associated with it that proponents refer to as subtle but
serious. The question of term limits is also brought to the table due to the fact that if so many
countries such as, Afghanistan, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Benin, and Yemen the list is
endless have employed this and is effective then why not the United States following the various
challenges currently being faced. (Central Intelligence Agency [US], n d) However, while
scholars vouch for the reviewing of the lifetime tenure of the Supreme Court justices (Hudson,
2017; Burbank, 2006; Shafritz, Lane, & Borick, 2005) the tenure proves worthwhile for the court
to be able to execute duties with efficiency for the democracy’s amelioration.
The lifetime tenure is believed to also work as a protective shield for the Supreme
justices against external pressures such as unjustified botheration from the legislative or

LIFETIME TENURE

3

executive branches. The justices are not affected by the political pressures that entail the peri...


Anonymous
Really helped me to better understand my coursework. Super recommended.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags