ONE JUSTICE, TWO JUSTICE, RED JUSTICE, BLUE JUSTICE: DISSECTING THE ROLE OF POLITICAL IDEOLOGY IN SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS

This Note argues that the United States Senate's current rules to confirm a president's nominee to the Supreme Court have evolved the Supreme Court into an imperfect and ideologically divisive body. Under the simplistic process currently employed by the president and the Senate, partisan and contentious actions are taken, neglecting the apolitical purpose the Supreme Court was meant to serve. Evidence of sectarian acts and resulting consequences exists in both statistical and verbal form. President Donald Trump will likely be tasked with appointing four justices to the Supreme Court, making the present procedure to confirm the president's nominee all the more significant. This Note concisely examines the current process for a nominee to successfully earn Supreme Court confirmation and depicts the history of the Court, concentrating on the two most recent times a president was provided the chance to nominate four Supreme Court justices. This Note explains how the current Supreme Court nomination and confirmation processes have been thrust into a politically charged realm. Additionally, this Note proposes a sensible solution to minimize ideological considerations in changes to the Supreme Court and create uniformity in the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches as developments in fundamental law unfold.