Rhetoric of Supreme Court Appointments

The rhetorical nature of supreme court appointments has always been incredibly fascinating. To begin with, essentially every presidential administration has at some point referenced supreme court decisions in their comments to the public. Reelections, policy goals and legacies all have to do with exactly when and how these comments are made. Obviously, the frequent referencing of these supreme court decisions has to mean something. Administrations keep going back to this which is why we have to take a look at the rhetoric, especially when it comes to the appointments themselves.

The language of court opinions is without question one of the most important components of the legal process. With that being said, what does the language mean when it comes to supreme court appointments? Well, in my opinion, the appointment process can be broken down into a few parts. First, the nomination stage is where we see the rhetoric take shape. Presidents typically nominate those who share their ideologies and beliefs. However, this is not always the case. During the nomination stage, the rhetoric is crafted to reassure those who support the president’s decisions and convince those who oppose the decision is plausible. That’s the goal.

After nominating appointees, confirmation takes place. This is where the rhetoric changes slightly. The rhetorical goals don’t change but the delivery of information does. After the appointees have been confirmed, the president will likely draw on the appointees past successes and from there, the president will point towards hope for the future. Although the rhetoric of supreme court appointments often goes overlooked, that certainly doesn’t make the process unimportant.

One thought on “Rhetoric of Supreme Court Appointments

  1. I think you are right when you say the rhetoric of supreme court appointments usually goes overlooked. Appointing a new supreme court justice is quite possibly the most important thing that the new president will do in this upcoming term. I also agree that the actual rhetoric used in these nominations does change over the course of the appointment.

Comments are closed.