They may be Supreme but they are also apparently Supremely forgettable. Two-thirds of Americans polled cannot name a single sitting Supreme Court justice. Of the relatively few who can remember a name it is that of the Chief Justice John Roberts. The least well known is Justice Stephen Breyer. Only one percent could remember them all.
Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas tied for second place with a measly sixteen percent.
Then follows Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg (13 percent), Sonia Sotomayor (13 percent), Anthony Kennedy (10 percent), Samuel Alito (5 percent), Elena Kagan (4 percent), and Stephen Breyer, (3 percent).
Of course, roughly half of people polled last year could not name a single GOP candidate for president. Forty one percent cannot name the current vice president of the United States.
We do even worse on international questions or trying to define the bill of rights.
There is a serious problem in this country, as I have previously discussed, with the lack of civics training in schools. It is a dangerous thing for citizens to be not just ignorant but detached from their political system. All governments love the uninformed and passive citizen but it makes for a dangerous void in accountability in this country.
Unfortunately, we are proving de Tocqueville correct in saying that “in a democracy, the people get the government they deserve.
Source: ABA Journal
Elaine M.
I hate to break it to you but much of the poor vote Democrat and if they had to take a general test on Civics they would fail miserably at least at a much higher percentage than those voting Republican.
Gene,
We all know that no Republicans vote on emotion. The Republican party–the party of creation science, women who are raped don’t get pregnant, CO2 is good for you, trickle down economics–you know the “intellectual” party.
😉
Jim,
I meant what does “bolds well” mean. Do you mean, perhaps, “bodes” well?
Project much, Jim?
The sad reality is that ignorance of civics is a bi-partisan plague, but if you just want to score on general ignorance and emotional voting it is hard to beat the party that is consistently ignorant of science and pandering to the religious right. When I was a kid, I had to take civics three times before I graduate high school – once in elementary school, once in junior high and once in high school. Now? Many if not most kids have never had the course once at any level. But let us consider who has the most to gain by an ill-informed electorate. The party that consistently wants to inject religion into government (the GOP contravening the 1st Amendment), further erode our civil rights (both parties) and let’s traitors and war criminals go free (the DNC contravening the Constitution, Federal law and international treaty)?
Just like blame for the mess we are in, there is plenty of both blame and stupid to go around in both parties.
That’s why partisanship is a sucker’s game, sucker, er, Jim.
Both parties suck. Some reason are in common. Some reasons are unique to each party. But they both still suck. They would suck less, however, if those with an anti-education agenda hadn’t all but wiped civics instruction off the educational map.
Elaine M.
The Democrat Party has an extremely higher percentage of supporters who have no clue about government and vote on emotion or what they can get. The dumber the electorate the better off the Democratic Party.
leejcaroll
he’s right and he’s white.
Meant to add I do canvassing for Obama campaign. I am amazed that when I run into people who are for Romney and ask them why, they cannot give a coegnt response, or for that matter, often a response. period.
The lack of intererst is evident in the dismal number of people who bother to vote.
Jim,
It “bolds” well for them? What does that mean?
Just the level of ignorance that the rich and their cheerleaders prefer.
This is good news for DEMS because they love an electorate that is stupid as it bolds well for them.
Elaine:
You are correct. The parenting certinly is the basis for which the school can provide the higher education. I suppose it would be good measure for our society to view education as being of great importance. If it did, many other issues would be gin to fall in place with regard to the system.
Why do we have six of nine sitting justices from New York? If is a fiction that Scalia is from New Jersey. That is like a New York suburb anyway. They both say tirty turd and a turd for 33rd Street and Third Avenue. We need some geographical and intellectual diversity. Too many hail from Yale, cant speak the King’s English and believe that they know everything. Listening to an oral argument on CSPAN is like getting stuck on a subway with no air conditioning in Brooklyn.
id707,
The reason the SCOTUS is not elected is to minimize the effect of politics on their rulings. This worked well for a long time, but recent history shows that the nomination and approval process can during periods of extreme polarization become politicized to the point of rendering that safeguard of judicial independence (critical for a properly functioning judiciary) a moot point. Reforms need to be made to how the Court is selected and seated. JT has made reform suggestions before. While I like his idea of a larger Court, I would go further than that and impose term limits. The lifetime appointment was also originally designed to protect judicial independence, but I think a long term (say 30 years) would still serve that function and also guarantee a bit of churn, bringing fresh blood to the Court more often and allowing their decisions to be more responsive to changes in society.
Darren,
“To achieve a better education, it requires the parents to take action on behalf of the individual student either by moving, or enrolling in a charter school or private school.”
I know something that could improve education in this country immensely: Parents should read to their children every day. They should read themselves–books, newspapers, etc. They should have meals with their children and discuss current events. They should make sure that their children do their homework. They should teach them to respect their teachers and classmates. They should make sure that their children eat nutritious meals. They should see to it that their children get a good night’s rest and not let them stay up too late on school nights. Parents shouldn’t let their children be couch potatoes and sit in front of the TV half the day. They should make sure their children get plenty of exercise. They should explore the environment with their children, take them to museums, help open their minds, play games with them. After all, parents are their children’s first teachers–and the people who spend more time with them than anyone else.
Fortunately, there are many parents in this country who take their parenting responsibilities seriously and do all of the above. Unfortunately, there are many parents who expect the schools to do it all.
I agree. Nothing better for the political class than an ignorant and passive populace.
One problem is in many areas of our primary education system there is not the resolve to improve the education of the students. To achieve a better education, it requires the parents to take action on behalf of the individual student either by moving, or enrolling in a charter school or private school.
After school, there does not seem to be as much interest in the general population to self educate on world affairs. Most people I would say would rather be entertained than educated.
Mahtso,
The supreme court is not elected. Good? Bad=
A constitutional question of rare kind:
Why are Congress and the President allowed to choose Justices? Do the Justices effect them. Sure as hell do. But is that the best way to select them?
Who cares what most people know! It would be a lot better if we required our Supreme Court Justices to know something!
A while back there was a post or two about the percentage of people who approve of the job the Court is doing. How seriously can that resulst be taken in light of a post like this one?
idealist,
In the video, Cenk Uygur said it was the Constitutional Accountability Center who had tracked the Supreme Court’s rulings.