Compared to Supreme Court nominations, those for the lower federal courts
a. are, although much greater in number, irrelevant to a president's policy agenda.
b. are not subject to partisan consideration.
c. have a much greater probability of being rejected by the Senate.
d. are not subject to senatorial courtesy.
e. None of these answers is correct.
Is A correct?
To determine whether answer choice A is correct, we need to compare Supreme Court nominations to nominations for the lower federal courts in terms of their relevance to a president's policy agenda.
To find the answer, we can consider several factors:
1. Number: Supreme Court nominations are relatively few compared to nominations for the lower federal courts. Each president typically has the opportunity to nominate numerous judges for the lower courts, while they may only have a few opportunities to nominate Supreme Court justices.
2. Relevance: While Supreme Court nominations receive significant attention due to the potential impact on major policy issues, such as constitutional interpretation, lower court nominations also contribute to a president's policy agenda. Judges on lower courts interpret and apply laws that can affect various policy areas, like criminal justice, civil rights, and regulatory matters.
Considering these factors, answer choice A is not correct. While lower court nominations may be more numerous, they are not irrelevant to a president's policy agenda. Thus, answer choice e, "None of these answers is correct," is the appropriate choice.