待遇丰厚，声名显赫！还能终身任职的美国最高法院法官是如何任命的？（附视频&解说稿）

有这样一项工作：它拥有极大权力，待遇丰厚 声名显赫，而且几乎没有被炒的风险。想要被雇佣只有一种途径，那就是获得美国联邦最高法院的任命。

美国联邦最高法院Supreme Court of the United States是美国联邦法院系统的最高审级和最高审判机关，是唯一由宪法规定的联邦法院。1869年根据国会法令规定由首席法官1人和法官8人组成，终身任职。联邦最高法院有权裁定联邦和各州的任何法律违宪而不被采用。

美国最高法院法官虽然是由总统任命的，但这不意味着法官要在政治上对总统效忠。最高法院同行政部门权力相当。法官的职责是权衡法律和宪法保障的权利，而非支持任何政治观点。显然地，法官审判时的个人意见在许多情况下可能同总统的意见相悖。这时，总统就采用他需要的人——一位支持其理论和信念的最高法院法官。最高法院为最高级别的法院。作为美国权利机构的司法部门，最高法院用于平衡立法部门和行政部门的权力，并对法律纠纷具有最终决定权。一旦最高法院做出判决，其他任何法院不得重审或推翻该项判决。

There’s a job out there with a great deal of power, pay, prestige, and near-perfect job security. And there’s only one way to be hired: get appointed to the US Supreme Court.

有这样一项工作：它拥有极大权力，待遇丰厚 声名显赫，而且几乎没有被炒的风险。想要被雇佣只有一种途径，那就是获得美国联邦最高法院的任命。

If you want to become a justice on the Supreme Court, the highest federal court in the United States, three things have to happen. You have to be nominated by the president of the United States, your nomination needs to be approved by the Senate, and finally, the president must formally appoint you to the court. Because the Constitution doesn’t specify any qualifications, in other words, that there’s no age, education, profession, or even native-born citizenship requirement, a president can nominate any individual to serve. So far, six justices have been foreign-born, at least one never graduated from high school, and another was only 32 years old when he joined the bench.

如果你想在美国最高法院，也就是联邦内最高等的法院出任大法官，有三个先决条件：首先，必须要被美国总统提名;其次，提名要获得参议院的批准;最后，总统必须要正式任命你到最高法院上任。由于宪法并没有对大法官的任职资格作出限定，换句话说，就是没有对年龄、教育水平以及专业的限制，甚至都没要求你必须是土生土长的美国人。就此职位，总统有权提名任何人，截至目前，一共产生了六位非本土出生的大法官，至少有一位是没有高中毕业的，还有一位成为大法官时才32岁。

Most presidents nominate individuals who broadly share their ideological view, so a president with a liberal ideology will tend to appoint liberals to the court. Of course, a justice’s leanings are not always so predictable. For example, when President Eisenhower, a Republican, nominated Earl Warren for Chief Justice, Eisenhower expected him to make conservative decisions. Instead, Warren’s judgements have gone down as some of the most liberal in the Court’s history. Eisenhower later remarked on that appointment as “the biggest damned-fool mistake” he ever made.

多数总统都会提名那些思想观念与自己类似的人，如果总统具有自由主义意识，则会倾向于委任自由派入驻最高法院。当然了，一个大法官的倾向并不会那么容易被预测。举个栗子：当共和党的艾森豪威尔任总统时，提名厄尔·沃伦为最高法院首席大法官。艾森豪威尔希望他的判决能保守一点，结果，沃伦的判决成为了最高法院历史上最自由派的一些判决。

后来，艾森豪威尔把这次提名看作是自己曾犯的“最大最愚蠢的错误”。

Many other factors come up for consideration, as well, including experience, personal loyalties, ethnicity, and gender. The candidates are then thoroughly vetted down to their tax records and payments to domestic help. Once the president interviews the candidate and makes a formal nomination announcement, the Senate leadership traditionally turns the nomination over to hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee. Depending on the contentiousness of the choice, that can stretch over many days. Since the Nixon administration, these hearings have averaged 60 days. The nominee is interviewed about their law record, if applicable, and where they stand on key issues to discern how they might vote. And especially in more recent history, the committee tries to unearth any dark secrets or past indiscretions. The Judiciary Committee votes to send the nomination to the full Senate with a positive or negative recommendation, often reflective of political leanings, or no recommendation at all. Most rejections have happened when the Senate majority has been a different political party than the president.

大法官的提名也会出于其他一些因素的考虑，包括阅历、忠诚度、种族以及性别，然后就是彻底审查候选人，——精细到他们的纳税记录和支付保姆的薪水。一旦总统面试该候选人并宣布正式的任命，参议院领导层将按照传统通过其司法委员会对此项任命进行听证。如若该项任命存在争议，听证可能会持续多日。自尼克松政府以来，听证会一般是60天左右，有些时候他们会被问及法律记录以及在关键问题上的立场、会投谁的票。特别是近年来，委员会会试图发掘一些被提名者的黑幕或是过去的轻率之举，司法委员会接着进行投票表决给出一个积极或者消极的建议，将提名提交给参议院。这些建议经常体现在政治倾向上，或是没任何建议。很多反对意见来自参议院中与总统异党的多数席位。

When the Senate does approve, it’s by a simple majority vote, with ties broken by the vice president. With the Senate’s consent, the president issues a written appointment, allowing the nominee to complete the final steps to take the constitutional and judicial oaths. In doing so, they solemnly swear to administer justice without respect to persons and do equal right to the poor and the rich and faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon a US Supreme Court justice. This job is for life, barring resignation, retirement, or removal from the court by impeachment. And of the 112 justices who have held the position, not one has yet been removed from office as a result of an impeachment. One of their roles is to protect the fundamental rights of all Americans, even as different parties take power.

参议院的通过需要简单多数票，如果票数持平，则由副总统决定，在参议院一致同意后，总统会做出书面任命，允许被提名者完成最后的步骤

对着宪法及司法起誓。这一过程中，他们庄严宣誓维护执法公正、不徇私情、对贫贱之人和富贵之户一视同仁、公平而忠诚地履行美国最高法院大法官的所有职责。这个职位是终身制的，除非辞职或是退休或是被弹劾。至今为止，美国历史上一共产生了112位大法官。尚无一人因被弹劾而离任，他们的职责之一就是维护所有美国百姓的基本权利，即使不同的政党上台。

With the tremendous impact of this responsibility, it’s no wonder that a US Supreme Court justice is expected to be, in the words of Irving R. Kaufman, “a paragon of virtue, an intellectual Titan, and an administrative wizard.” Of course, not every member of the Court turns out to be an exemplar of justice. Each leaves behind a legacy of decisions and opinions to be debated and dissected by the ultimate judges, time and history.

因其责任重大，欧文·R·卡夫曼曾经这样表达过，对美国联邦最高法院的大法官们的期望：“美德之典范，知识之巨人，行政之向导”。当然，并非法院的所有法官都能成为公正的典范，每一位都给后人留下值得珍视的判决及观念。这些就都交于时间和历史来作最终的评判和剖析吧。