Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the US Constitution assigns the President power to nominate a Supreme Court justice with the "advice and consent" of the Senate. Appointment to the Court is a shared power, not the President's alone.
Although the Framers didn't explain their reasons for establishing this particular system, political expedience undoubtedly played a role. One person (the President), representing a single party (but mindful of the other party's political power), can make an informed choice fairly quickly. The Senate, on the other hand, with two parties fighting for control, could get bogged down in partisan politics and drag out selection for a long time.
If the Senate only has one person to evaluate, their role becomes much simpler: investigate, evaluate, appoint or reject. This is a dramatic oversimplification of the appointment process, but the general reasoning seems sound.
The shared power between Executive and Legislative branches is part of the US government's system of checks and balances that helps ensure no single branch becomes too powerful.
Article II, Section 2, Clause 2
"[The President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the United States, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferior officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments."
The President appoints new supreme court justices.
True- such is how Supreme Court Justices are chosen.
George Washington had the opportunity to appoint the most Justices of the Supreme Court. He appointed 11, out of the 14 he nominated.
No. The Executive Branch appoints US Supreme Court justices with the approval of the Senate.
No. It only depends on how many supreme court justices leave office during the Presidents term. For example, if all of them died and/or decided to retire, the president would have the opportunity to appoint the entire bench.
the president
The power to appoint Supreme Court justices belongs exclusively to the President of the United States.
The President appoints new supreme court justices.
Jimmy Carter and William Henry Harrison did not appoint any Supreme Court Justices.
A president is not required to appoint any justices and may, in fact, not have an opportunity to do so. Justices serve for life, so presidents have to wait for a vacancy to arise through retirement or death.A president is not required to appoint any Supreme Court justices, unless there is a vacancy. The Supreme Court of the United States was created in 1789.
True- such is how Supreme Court Justices are chosen.
George Washington had the opportunity to appoint the most Justices of the Supreme Court. He appointed 11, out of the 14 he nominated.
No. The Executive Branch appoints US Supreme Court justices with the approval of the Senate.
The Senate
He can appoint Justices, but they have to be approved by congress.
No one directly appoints Supreme Court Justices. The president nominates candidates, and the senate accepts or rejects the nominees. So the president indirectly appoints justices, pending senate approval.
To appoint new justices to the supreme court >.<