The United States Supreme Court is comprised of nine justices, each assuming his/her lifetime position by means of a Presidential appointment. While the justices pledge to resolve legal issues on their merits, guided by the precepts of the US Constitution, it is clear that their judgments are heavily colored by their personal, social, political and religious perspectives. This becomes quite clear when they make judgments on so-called social issues.
Framing Decisions states that a review of the workings of the Supreme Court in its decision making capacity—i.e., in rendering judgments on the Constitutionality of laws and behaviors—shows that determining whether decision processes and outcomes are rational doesn’t make sense when dealing with decisions made by collective bodies that wrestle with decisions of consequence. (1-2 pages total)
a. Provide an argument that supports the Framing Decisions perspective.
b. Provide an argument that refutes the Framing Decisions perspective.
c. Framing Decisions suggests that when dealing with fairly trivial decisions made by individuals, the rationality of a decision process and its outcome is fairly easy to determine. What is the rationale of this assertion? Do you agree with it? Explain.
d. Framing Decisions suggests that when dealing with decisions of consequence that have objectively verifiable correct answers, we can determine whether the decision process and its outcome are rational. What is the rationale of this assertion? Do you agree with it? Explain.