You’re Not Voting for a President but for Supreme Court Judges

Exactly one month from today we will vote for our next President! This year we’ve talked about “Political Prayer Preparation”, the “Decision America Tour 2016”, “God’s Power in the 2016 Presidential Election”, the “Presidential Primary Election”, “Walking in the Old Paths” and “Our Submission to Government”.

I have been frustrated with our two major party nominees, Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Really? These are the United States’ best choices? Granted, there are other parties but, sadly, I feel they have no chance of winning. We have to wade through the candidates’ petty bickering, personal email accounts and Miss America opinions just to get to their stances and promises. Up until now I’ve had no idea who I would vote for but then I read an article that gave me hope and that’s what we’re talking about today. It’s funny because the vote for the candidates really has nothing to do with the candidates!

In an article titled, “A Supreme Decision” in the latest issue of Decision Magazine , Cathy Ruse gives us hope. I know as a Christian our “hope” comes from God (Psalm 3:2-4, 147:11; Job 17:3,15; Romans 5:2; 1 Peter 1:3) but I believe God gave Cathy Ruse this unique viewpoint for us to prayerfully consider where we place our vote. The branch of the Supreme Court was designed to referee the law in an objective and unbiased way. The problem is that the last 60 years have seen many judges vote according to political party and try to be the voice of current culture as opposed to the Constitution and laws that are right and best regardless of how the culture of the minute “feels”.

The importance of these judges decisions can’t be overemphasized. Ruse explains it’s very possible in the near future we could see homeschooling being outlawed, saying children are victims of bigot teaching in homes with religious parents, declining women from ordination could be a crime and just speaking against LGBT views could be criminally punishable. I’m not trying to scare you into a knee jerk reaction, but these are examples given in the article that is well within the realm of possibility. Remember Martin Niemoller’s quote, “When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat. When they came for the trade unionists, I did not speak out; I was not a trade unionist. When they came for the Jews, I remained silent; I wasn’t a Jew. When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out.”

So now we recognize the importance of these judges but if they’re not voted in how much hope do we have that the next President will appoint any new ones? Interestingly, of the 9 total spots, 1 just passed away and by the next Presidential election 5 will be over 70 and 3 in their 80s. My estimate* is that we will see the next President appoint 4, possibly 5, new Supreme Court judges in the next 4 years!

I’m not just trying to stack the Supreme Court with a bunch of Conservatives (but if that’s how the game is played and we’re asking God to make our country healthy again that may not be such a bad option), I’m asking for referees who will be objective and protect the rights of Christians and non-Christians. Clinton said “she would strive to appoint judges in the mold of liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor” (Source 1, p. 15)**, who votes liberally on “campaign speech, religion, juvenile crime, federal power and Miranda warnings”, etc. (see article here). Whereas Trump has published a list of judges he would nominate (click here), in the vein of Antonin Scalia, who hold to the Constitution.

I hope this information, which was a revelation to me, is helpful for you. Please prayerfully consider how you will vote a month from now, considering that the election has very little to do with the candidates and much more about the Supreme Court Justices that they appoint and the wide ranging, long-lasting impacts. Do your own research and see which list of judges will vote not according to political preferences, but instead according to the Constitution as a referee of the law.


*Partially based upon Yoest’s comment, “The next President will almost certainly appoint at least four Supreme Court justices” (Source 2).

**Clinton has not officially published a list of judges but there is a very likely list (read it here) of who she would appoint.



Source 1: Cathy Ruse, “A Supreme Decision”, Decision Magazine, Volume 57, Number 9, September 2016, pp. 12-15.

Source 2: Charmaine Yoest, “A Life or Death Decision”, Decision Magazine, Volume 57, Number 9, September 2016, p. 21.