NCJ Number
127945
Journal
Judicature Volume: 74 Issue: 4 Dated: (December-January 1991) Pages: 198-202
Date Published
1991
Length
5 pages
Annotation
This article offers some explanations as to why the U.S. Constitution omits judicial qualifications, although it specifies qualifications for the President and members of the U.S. Congress.
Abstract
The article hypothesizes that judicial qualifications may not have been considered by the framers of the Constitution to be as important as qualifications for elected officials. Also, judicial qualifications, especially regarding education, might have been more difficult to specify at a time when legal education was less systematic. Judicial qualifications might have been omitted for fear they would intensify fears of an aristocratic judiciary. The founders may have expected Congress to establish judicial qualifications for lower Federal judges. Further, the Federal Constitution may have been influenced by the example of contemporary State constitutions in omitting judicial qualifications. The latter explanation, however, begs the question as to why the States omitted judicial qualifications in their constitutions. The framers of the U.S. Constitution might also have expected that the visibility of the President and his appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court would provide protection against the appointment of unqualified justices. The language of Articles II and III suggests, but does not prove, that the framers may also have thought that the justices or other judges would appoint lower court personnel. 55 footnotes