Summary
Alvarez (2012, p. 1) article provides an argument on remaking of the Florida Supreme Court. Republicans are the ones who have campaigned for the removal of the three state Supreme Court justices by voters (Alvarez, 2012, p. 1). This move is aimed at ensuring that the Legislature has more power than the Supreme Court in terms of judicial rules and appointment procedures. This issue of remaking of Florida’s Supreme Court is regarded as a politically divisive matter, which Florida is experiencing currently. “President Obama’s health care law” (Alvarez, 2012, p. 1), was the foundation of political divisions in 2010, in Florida. The ruling of Florida Supreme Court in 2010 granted Floridians a right to refuse to purchase mandatory health insurance. The ballot summary was argued to have “misleading and ambiguous language” (Alvarez, 2012, p. 2) according to justices, and the Legislature was tasked with a role of fixing the situation. Nevertheless, the situation is back in ballot irrespective of fixation by the lawmakers.
“..this is a full-frontal attack — that had been in the weeds before — on a fair and impartial judicial system, which is the cornerstone and bedrock of our democracy.” (Alvarez, 2012, p. 2). This is a claim, which was made by one of the judges - Justice R. Fred Lewis - aimed at in the campaign for remaking of Florida Supreme Court. The other judges are Barbara J. Pariente and Peggy A. Quince. It is a common routine to have the Florida Supreme Court justices present, every six years, on the ballot as a means of merit retention system (Alvarez, 2012, p. 3). Floridians vote on basis of no or yes on whether there is a need of having the justices on bench. This process of appellation, retaining, and selection of judges based on competency rather than politics was instituted in 1970s. The process has been enjoying free politics until 2010 when the running of the process had significant changes.
Campaigns are now being conducted on the process of justices. Decisions on justice’s removal are based on incompetence or misconduct instead of disagreements based on some decisions. In their view, democrats believe that this campaign is aimed at providing powers to Gov. Rick Scott, who is a republican, to appoint the needed three new justices. The Legislature of Florida also needs to have more control of judiciary. The three justices are engaged in an interview where they present varying views on judiciary. However, the Legislature is obtaining more support from police and fire unions while influencing the Judiciary.
Analysis
This article is a clear illustration of the functionality of the various organs of the government. The article indicates that government organs may be in a conflict as it is indicated in Judiciary and Legislature system of Florida where the Legislature organ wants to have more control and power over the Judiciary system. In any government, the Judiciary has the role of making and implementing laws, but the Legislature has an equal vote in the law process. This article provides a clear example of how two government organs in conflict may result into confusion of public on what needs to be done.
The topics in the text book have indicated how politics play a significant role in influencing the functionality of government organs, as well as the implementation of laws and rules. This is what the article has evidenced by highlighting the influence of politics in Florida’s Judiciary system. This is in terms of campaigning for the change of the Florida Supreme Court. As it happens in the political field, stakeholders have different perceptions, opinions, and views concerning a matter regarding the welfare of a nation. The article has indicated this by showing the differences between the perception of democrats and republicans on Florida Judiciary system.
Reference
Alvarez, L. (October 2, 2012). G.O.P Aims to Remake Florida Supreme Court. Retrieved
from: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/03/us/republican-party-aims-to-remake-florida-supreme-court.html?pagewanted=all
