Patrick Leahy Quotes

It is a mistake to suppose that the Supreme Court is either honoured or helped by being spoken of as beyond criticism. On the contrary, the life and character of its justices should be the objects of constant watchfulness by all, and its judgments subject to the freest criticism.

Do not use a litmus test in the appointment of judges. Just get good judges.

I was driven years ago to the conclusion that political considerations had not hurt the character of appointments here [the supreme court].

I believe strongly that we should have nominees to the United States Supreme Court based on their qualifications rather than any litmus test.

I have ventured to write more intimately about my personal life than is customary for a member of the Supreme Court, and with that candor comes a measure of vulnerability.

There are a lot of wonderful people in America who shouldn't be on the Supreme Court - and a lot who should be on the court who aren't such wonderful people.

It (lifetime appointment of judges) is the best expedient which can be devised in any government, to secure a steady, upright, and impartial administration of the laws.

The process has failed to prevent the President, the Senate, or both, from caring primarily about the immediate political gains of an appointment, and thus from being indifferent or even consciously opposed to considering any of the factors truly relevant to selecting competent jurists.

Judges are terrible politicians.

The fascination about being a judge is the same about the duty of being a judge, and that is to ask yourself, Why am I about to rule the way I am about to rule? You must always ask yourself that question.

We need a Supreme Court justice who will restore fairness, balance, and independence to the highest level of the judiciary. Based on his record, I do not believe Gorsuch would be that kind of justice.

I have no doubt that if confirmed, Judge Gorsuch would help to restore confidence in the rule of law. His years on the bench reveal a commitment to judicial independence - a record that should give the American people confidence that he will not compromise principle to favor the president who appointed him.

I don't think that a Justice should have uppermost in her mind, 'A Democratic president appointed me, so I must leave to be sure that another Democratic president can appoint my successor.'

Our judiciary has a reputation for intellectual rigour, careful consideration of the arguments, and a serious-minded determination to each decision based on what is right and not necessarily what is superficially popular. I am not sure that all politicians have the same reputation.

Appointments to the higher judiciary must be through transparent processes, which ensure that persons of impeccable integrity and high competence are appointed to these positions.

To guard our most cherished values and the law that holds us together, America needs a Supreme Court justice committed to the people's Constitution. Neil Gorsuch is that person.

What is it that makes us trust our judges? Their independence in office and manner of appointment.

The worst thing you want is a willy-nilly judge who is swayed by the political whims of the era or the time. What you want is a judge who is thinking about what he or she is doing and is thinking about it in a principled way.

You can have many different selection systems, but the bottom line has to be a system that, once the judge takes office that judge will feel that he or she is to decide the case without reference to the popular thing or the popular will of the moment.

I don't know how a judge can concentrate on being fair and impartial when he or she is faced with possible jail time for making a decision that others deem incorrect.

Nobody wants a judge to be subject to the political whim of the moment.

The hard necessity of bringing the judge on the bench down into the dock has been the peculiar responsibility of the writer in all ages of man.

Judges must be free from political intervention or intimidation.

…if I should once permit such political considerations to interfere with the administration of justice in this office, where could I stop? If I should once begin to allow my official conduct to be swayed by considerations such as those, I feel it would end by eventually leading me wholly astray.

That's what you want in a judge—someone who can take the heat after following his or her own conscience.