# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Aaron and Quinn, I think since technology has become more dominant in the public's life, that gives a possible reason of why more cases are becoming more/less popular because more people hear about it and voice their opinions.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Chase. Does time as a judge matter if someone with less experience is doing a great job?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Chase in that time does not equal experience. People can be around something for a long time but do a bad job and not have very good experience.

I also agree with Emily that sometimes experience won't be able to help out if the case is something new that nobody will have experience on.

# data[].attributes.body
I also agree with Wendy that there are small businesses online as well, and they too are affected by big e-retailers such as Amazon and eBay.

I agree with Mrs Ammons about tax and shipping impacting me and how I shop online. It can become a determining factor when you want to shop for small things that cost less than the shipping cost.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that experience is less important, age doesn’t correlate to knowledge or possible influence.
I like Chases question that “How do you rate experience?”.
I also like how Rachel said that young judges could possibly see their rulings have an impact and make better choices moving forward.

# data[].attributes.body
to answer Mrs. Ammons question about do wisdom and experience go hand in hand?
the definition of experience is the knowledge or mastery of an event or subject gained through involvement in or exposure to it. but wisdom is also having experience, knowledge, and good judgement.

So I think that experience is a part of having wisdom but not all of it.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Emily. Experience won’t necessarily change the outcome.

I think wisdom isn’t knowledge, which is very important. Without knowledge of how our government works, or knowledge of the constitution, a Supreme Court Justice doesn’t have the tools to make big decisions

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Emily that experience doesn't always mean that someone is the best for the job. Experience doesn't measure  how well you will achieve. I also agree with Chase that time doesn't always mean that they are the best because they could have done a lousy job during their long career.

Wisdom is important because if someone isn't aware of the constitution and how the government works and their opinions in court will be incorrect.

I think the drawbacks of no tax online do not outweigh the benefits. If anything large purchases should require tax.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Natalie. All of those attributes are important in a supreme court justice, but some values are more important than others. I also agree with Aaron that experience is a given in supreme court justices. i agree with Wendy as well. An older, more experienced judge may not rule the best way on a case that involves something newer such as media. That justice may have more experience in being a lawyer or a judge, they may not have much experience with newer aspects of life that are a huge deal in America, and they may not rule the best way for the people. I agree with Natalie. A younger supreme justice would need a lot of credibility and people behind them to be able to become a supreme court justice.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that taxing online purchases is not right. It makes it harder for small businesses, and hurts their business. It's unreasonable to have to pay for both shipping and sales tax, the shipping and handling cost should be the only extra cost that is added to online purchases.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Natalie, I think it's obvious that a judge needs experience and they won't get "hired" without experience, however Wendy also brings up a good point how life experience goes into the equation as well. Work experience and life experience are two different things however still impact a judge's opinion.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel like a 30 year old judge would be more prone to thinking like people he/she surrounds themselves with first, and then having to learn to think about the other people later.
I also feel like sometimes the Supreme Court only takes on those cases that the public expects them to speak on, they mostly take on cases that affect a lot of people, but are less in the public's light, like the labor union and online tax articles.
I remembered how Sydney brought up something about a 1977 court case decision in the article about labor unions and it reminded me about how I think the Supreme Court should go back sometimes and update their rulings based on the times. However, I understand that this is unrealistic because of their agenda but I do believe that decisions change along with the times.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Jake. I think right now anything done by our country, our government, and our president will be criticized and scrutinized more because everything is very controversial now and is in the public’s light

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Sydney. The travel ban is very controversial and shows that all the small courts have struck it down. But now the Supreme Court will give it’s final ruling

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Grayson and Jake on how they said the constitution is very important because it is the Supreme Courts duty to use the constitution to deem things constitution and unconstitutional.

I agree with Casey and Grayson that the travel ban is probably more important than the others and I think that these issues be more public because these policies can effect millions of people.

I don t understand how things can get struck down so quickly and things like the travel ban are actually considered when in my eyes the average man can see that an act like this is obviously unconstitutional.

I agree again with Grayson that the ban is similar too Frances but that it is a reaction and I believe it needs to be thought through better even if the reaction was based off of reaction.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Davin, experience is different from knowledge. Experience will come but isn’t necessary in order to be efficient in government.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with the others who put the Constitution first of importance regarding the Supreme Court. We can see the relevance of the Constitution in the case regarding Trump's travel ban because the lowers courts have found the ban to violate the Constitution's provision for freedom of religion.

I think this article is in opposition to the travel ban because it presents the illegality of it and none of the benefits or safety measures. The only defense it gives the ban is the way it can become law, not reasons why it should become law.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Davin, the Supreme Court has to follow by the Constitution.

The Supreme Court uses change to help decide if they should pass laws or not, by changing a small piece of a bill can help it pass.

I agree with Sydney that the Travel Ban is so controversial because it revolves around Trump, but that each level of the courts gets a chance to explain their reasoning as to why they think it is or is not constitutional.

# data[].attributes.body
The supreme court should be following and upholding the constitution, just like Davin expressed.

I like how Grayson said that the constitution is a nice piece to go off and follow for ruling.

I like Monse put change near the end because I feel they're there to make changes but how they rule things it either has no change or has significant change.

I agree with Davin in how with Trump's ban isn't in the nation's interest. It seems like it's being implemented for certain reasons but all reasons they have multiple solutions in less extreme manners than what Trump wants to execute.

Seerat saying that it's in the presidents "bias" was another great way to put his recent involvement with all the bans and his plans for isolation and shutdown of other countries.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with what Davin said abour it being the Supreme Court’s main job to look at whether or not something is constitutional, because in all of the articles there was something mentioned about the issue being constitutional or not which really solidified it as the most important thing to the Supreme Court in my opinion.

I agree that experience isn’t the most important thing to be a Supreme Court justice. I think even as a “young” judge you can still make informed decisions that are beneficial to the country even if you haven’t been a justice for 20+ years.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Sydney as far as the Constitution being most important, but I also think it depends on how strict or loose a supreme court justice chooses to interpret the Constitution

I put experience last because generally a SCJ doesn’t necessarily need experience, but many have been lawyers in the past, so by default, they have those experiences.

I also think that the judges aren’t intending to make “change”, they’re just determining constitutional vs. unconstitutional, which then can change history, like Grayson said.

The fact that the travel ban is such a politically divisive topic, I think that’s why it would get more attention, rather than the other two we were reading.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Davin that the constitution should be first in importance to them because it is their job and their main focus.
I also agree with Monse about change being towards the last on the list because the supreme court avoids change.
I don't think their really focusing on changing the constitution but rather enforcing it and applying it to how it would be carried out.
I think that changes are made more in the states rather than a federal change.
The main argument against Trump's travel ban is that it is unconstitutional that they are aiming it towards one group of people.
I also agree that Trump's ban is biased rather than looking out for the whole country.

# data[].attributes.body
I too feel like change is least important in the SCJ because they aren't actively changing our society. They're job is to decide what is and isn't constitutional. Sometime that decision will cause change but the supreme courts job isn't to change things, oftentimes they make rulings based off precedent. They want consistency and constitutionality over everything else.