{ "id": "RL32821", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "RL32821", "active": false, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 308380, "date": "2005-09-23", "retrieved": "2016-04-07T19:31:02.462029", "title": "The Chief Justice of the United States: Responsibilities of the Office and Process for Appointment", "summary": "The lifetime appointment of the Chief Justice of the United States is an event of major\nsignificance\nin American politics because of the enormous power that the Supreme Court exercises as the highest\nappellate court in the federal judiciary. The Chief Justice, like each of the Court\u2019s other\neight\nJustices, casts one vote when the Court rules on cases. However, the Chief Justice is also\n\u201cfirst\namong equals\u201d and exercises a unique leadership role as the presiding officer of the Court,\nas the\nmanager of the Court\u2019s overall operations, and as head of the federal judicial branch of\ngovernment. \nThere is no formal list of qualifications for the job; the Constitution\u2019s only mention of the\nChief\nJustice is as presiding officer of the Senate during an impeachment trial of the President. Chief\nJustice appointments occur infrequently, with only 16 individuals having served in that position\nsince 1789 -- an average tenure of 13\u00bd years per Chief Justice.\n \n The process for appointing a Chief Justice is the same as for appointing Associate Justices and\ntypically involves a sharing of responsibilities between the President, who nominates the Justices,\nand the Senate, which provides \u201cadvice and consent.\u201d (Exceptions to this have been\nrare instances\nwhen the President has made temporary \u201crecess appointments\u201d to the Court, which\ndo not require\nthe Senate\u2019s approval.) Vacancies on the Court can occur as a result of death, retirement,\nor\nresignation of a Justice. Chief Justice nominees may be selected from the ranks of sitting Associate\nJustices (as three of the 16 Chief Justices were) or from outside the Court, with each approach, from\nthe perspective of the President, having certain advantages and disadvantages. The criteria that\nPresidents use in selecting a Supreme Court nominee vary, but typically involve policy and political\nconsiderations as well as a desire to select a person with outstanding professional qualifications and\nunquestioned integrity. Leadership qualities may also be important when the Chief Justice position\nis involved. Presidents have also varied in the degree to which they have sought or used advice from\nSenators in selecting Supreme Court nominees. \n \n As part of Senate consideration, the Judiciary Committee holds hearings on the nominee and\nvotes on whether to report the nomination favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation. \nRegardless of the outcome of that vote, the reporting of a Supreme Court nomination sends it to the\nfull Senate for debate and a vote. Like the President, Senators may evaluate the nominee by such\nstandards as professional excellence, integrity, and leadership qualities, but may also (again, as the\nPresident is free to do) focus on the nominee\u2019s judicial philosophy, views on constitutional\nissues,\nor how they believe the appointment might affect the Court\u2019s future direction on major legal\nand\nconstitutional issues.\n \n Under any circumstances, the appointment of a new Chief Justice will command the attention\nof Congress, especially the Senate, which votes on whether to confirm judicial nominations. Even\nmore attention could be expected concerning such an event in the current political environment, in\nlight of the controversy that has recently surrounded the judicial appointment process and the\nimportance the President and Senators of both parties have attached to upcoming Supreme Court\nappointments.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL32821", "sha1": "173d3f780ddf612c2a3aa9f1cf522efe39f93031", "filename": "files/20050923_RL32821_173d3f780ddf612c2a3aa9f1cf522efe39f93031.html", "images": null }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL32821", "sha1": "95bf847e26a09cb286295dbeae8a11f76d39f5e0", "filename": "files/20050923_RL32821_95bf847e26a09cb286295dbeae8a11f76d39f5e0.pdf", "images": null } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc812532/", "id": "RL32821_2005Sep12", "date": "2005-09-12", "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26", "title": "The Chief Justice of the United States: Responsibilities of the Office and Process for Appointment", "summary": null, "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20050912_RL32821_3c47ed054a1b786da8eb27a40694a11062d5fcb0.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20050912_RL32821_3c47ed054a1b786da8eb27a40694a11062d5fcb0.html" } ], "topics": [] }, { "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department", "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metacrs7287/", "id": "RL32821 2005-03-17", "date": "2005-03-17", "retrieved": "2005-09-27T14:14:07", "title": "The Chief Justice of the United States: Responsibilities of the Office and Process for Appointment", "summary": "As part of Senate consideration, the Judiciary Committee holds hearings on the nominee and votes on whether to report the nomination favorably, unfavorably, or without recommendation. Regardless of the outcome of that vote, the reporting of a Supreme Court nomination sends it to the full Senate for debate and a vote. Like the President, Senators may evaluate the nominee by such standards as professional excellence, integrity, and leadership qualities, but may also (again, as the President is free to do) focus on the nominee's judicial philosophy, views on constitutional issues, or how they believe the appointment might affect the Court's future direction on major legal and constitutional issues.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORT", "active": false, "formats": [ { "format": "PDF", "filename": "files/20050317_RL32821_85f1eda255fe868937a1f1cf7a2d8134ba957a17.pdf" }, { "format": "HTML", "filename": "files/20050317_RL32821_85f1eda255fe868937a1f1cf7a2d8134ba957a17.html" } ], "topics": [ { "source": "LIV", "id": "Law", "name": "Law" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Supreme Court nominations", "name": "Supreme Court nominations" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Supreme Court justices", "name": "Supreme Court justices" }, { "source": "LIV", "id": "Presidents", "name": "Presidents" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Constitutional Questions", "Foreign Affairs" ] }