As I watched the Supreme Court justices sit calmly in their chairs on the House floor last week, as George W. Bush gave his last State of the Union address to an opera of screaming congressmen and women dishing out their rahs, cheers, boos and hisses like they were at a junior high pep rally, I regained an admiration for the justices that is often lost in the hoopla of election years and cable news networks.

Year after year, the defenders of the Constitution play a vital role in doing just that, and there are numerous lessons that can be taken from these mighty Supreme Court justices. The men and the woman that sit on the bench are some of the most intelligent faces in government, yet most Americans probably couldn’t even name one of them unless they were referenced in an episode of “Family Guy.” Their under-the-radar status makes it even more intriguing when you learn about their educations, their knowledge of all things Constitutional and, most importantly, their utmost respect for one another in and outside of the courtroom.

For instance, USA Today describes the close friendship between former ACLU lawyer Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and co-founder of the Federalist Society Justice Antonin Scalia as an “unlikely friendship.” They seemed surprised that two people who embodied two completely different ideologies have celebrated every New Year’s Eve for more than two decades together with their spouses. And, as USA Today reported, people are “mystified” by their friendship, and some observers actually worry that they are having an effect on each other in the courtroom. And to the typical armchair politician, the close relationship may seem fishy, since the only example that most of us get of opposing party members attempting to work together is in Congress.

Because we all know how that goes. But this just goes to show the lessons that can be learned from the Supreme Court, both by us and by politicians everywhere. The typical actions in Congress are dishonest, two-faced and highly immature by comparison.

Debate is long, heated and usually unproductive – unless you count a resolution to congratulate the year’s NCAA Champions as an accomplishment. And politicians only care about themselves and their districts – or, more accurately, getting re-elected in their districts. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, upholds respect for each other — unlike Congress, which is more like a VH1 reality show with nothing at stake but our country’s future and welfare. All that’s missing is a giant clock around Nancy Pelosi’s neck and Ted Kennedy joining “Celebrity Rehab.”

If the political world took note from our judicial branch, it would probably lead to higher productivity, due to the fact that when people respect each other, they will listen to each other.

There will always be disagreements among politicians, but if the mud-slinging ends, there would be greater trust in our government by the people and less debauchery.

We all know members of Congress are out for their own special interests, pretending they care in their lame attempts to win hearts for their own re-elections or future presidential elections. Unfortunately, with the scrutiny of the media and everyday bloggers, politics has become more personal, much like the days of yore, when literal mudslinging would occur – such as the time when Thomas Jefferson’s campaign writer, James Callender, called President Adams “a hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.”

So while the drama fit for a high school musical may never cease in the legislative and executive branches, the nine men and women of the Supreme Court will continue to hold intelligent debate, uphold the Constitution and set a shining example of how individuals with very diverse viewpoints can work together for the common good, even if no one seems to notice.

– Andrew Gionnette is a senior in mechanical engineering from Chanhassen, Minn.