570 PART SIX APPOINTED OFFICIALS ANALYZE THE ISSUE difference between a "monastery"and a "circus."17 The quiet setting of the Ideology on the Supreme Court,the dignity of its proceedings,and the lack of fanfare with which it Court announces its decisions give the impression that the Court is about as far Supreme Court justices removed from the world of politics as a governmental institution can possibly normally take ideological be.Above all else,however,Supreme Court justices are political officials who positions that are roughly in exercise the authority of a separate and powerful branch of government.They line with what the presidents who appointed them are appointed through a political process,they bring their political views with expected.Of recent justices them to the Court,and they have regular opportunities to promote their political who have not conformed to beliefs through the cases they decide. expectations-including Justices Warren,Blackmun, and Stevens-most have The Role of Partisanship tended to be more liberal than expected,particularly on Not surprisingly,partisanship is a critical test of potential jurists:presidents issues of civil liberties.Do nearly always nominate someone from their own party in order to increase the you think this is just a chances of appointing a justice with political views similar to their own.Before coincidence,or does it nominating Oliver Wendell Holmes,Jr.,to the Court,Theodore Roosevelt wrote suggest something basic about the Court's role in to Henry Cabot Lodge for his opinion,saying,"I should hold myself as guilty of protecting the rights of the an irreparable wrong to the nation if I should put in his place any man who was individual? ltely ne and sound on the great national policies for which we sta in public life."18 Presidents generally manage to appoint individuals who-share their political philosophy.Although justices are free to go their own way on the Court,their legal philosophies can be inferred from their prior activities.Robert Scigliano found that about three of every four appointees have behaved on the Supreme 必 Court approximately as presidents could have expected.19 Of course,a president has no guarantee that a nominee will fulfill his hopes.Justices Earl Warren and ブ9e. William Brennan proved more liberal than President Dwight D.Eisenhower would have liked.When he was asked whether he had made any mistakes as president,Eisenhower replied,"Yes,two,and they are both sitting on the Supreme Court."20 Presidents also tend to nominate members of their own party to lower-court judgeships.All recent presidents except Gerald Ford have selected more than 90 percent of their district-and appeals-court nominees from among members of their own party.21 Should "Merit"Play a Larger Role? Over the years the partisanship evident in court appointments has occasionally come under attack.In the early nineteenth century,Progressive reformers persuaded some states to exclude their judgeships from party patronage positions.The Missouri Plan is a more recent reflection of the belief that partisan loyalty should not play a deciding role in the filling of judicial offices. Quoted in Mary Frances Berry,Stability,Security,and Continuity:Mr.Justice Burton and Decision- Making in the Supreme Court(Westport,Conn.:Greenwood Press,1978),27. Quoted in Walter Murphy and C.Herman Pritchett,eds.,Courts,Judges,and Politics,3d ed.(New York:Random House,1979),137. Robert Scigliano,The Supreme Court and the Presidency (New York:Free Press,1971),146 2Quoted in Baum,Supreme Court,37. 2C.Herman Pritchett,The American Constitutional System (New York:McGraw-Hill,1967),76; Herbert Jacob,Justice in America:Courfs,Lnwyers,and the Judicial Process,4th ed.(Glenview,Il.: Scott,Foresman,1984),122