Supreme Court

Supreme Court is part of the political process? Many would assume that the court is a non-political branch –Made up of 9 individuals, unelected, non-partisan, serve life terms »But the justices themselves hold political values – influence decisions –Determine values of the U.S. when they render decisions »How much power the president has; define the right to privacy, power of police, etc.. History of the Court –Article III, section 2 defines the powers of the court »“Judicial power shall extend to all Cases in law and equity - laws of the U.S. – Treaties – Ambassadors – Public Minister & Consuls – Cases of Admiralty & Maritime – Controversies over states, States and citizen, and Foreign states and or subjects” –Early courts met infrequently – accomplished very little »Where do you start? Its like being a mosquito in a nudist colony »Very unglamorous job

Supreme Court Framers Intentions Determine what the constitution is and is not –Failed to spell out the how the interpretation function was to operate –Though its stated the judicial power of the court to “all cases under the constitution” »No mention that the Court had the power to declare specific law or actions unconstitutional –This power came later first land mark case (1803) Marbury v. Madison – case is political Marbury v. Madison President John Adams appointed several judges to various judgeships –Adam made appointments the night before he was to leave as President of the U.S. “mid-night” legislation –Thomas Jefferson became president next day – noticed the legislation – ordered the appointments not to be delivered »William Marbury filled a writ of mandamus – requires that a public official perform a specific duty »Writ of mandamus (Act of 1789) had give the Court original jurisdiction in such matter

Supreme Court John Marshall (chief justice) made the case about constitutionality Whether the Judiciary act of 1789 was a constitutional act enacted by congress –Marshall ruled that the Supreme Court was not the court with the Jurisdiction to rule »Over ruled the Congress – who had given the power in the first place Methods of Interpretation Justices are classified into two schools of Constitutional interpretations –Strict construction and non-construction Strict constructionist – constitution read literally & rigid guidelines –Framers constitutional intentions must be discerned Non-Constructionist – constitution is a political document & flexible – must be adapted & updated to politics in modern times

Supreme Court Other Elements Judicial restraint & Judicial activism –Judicial restraint – justices should only rule on court cases in gross miss-rulings of lower courts »Exercise jurisprudence – uphold previous court decisions –Judicial activism – Court take active role in creating new precedents (policies) Ultimately Court rulings are made according to all 4 –Constructionist, non-constructionist, judicial restraint, judicial activism »Rulings are made in general terms 1) provides flexibility and interpretation –Constitution does not say ‘read me broadly’ or ‘read me narrowly’ »The above provides a outline for court case decisions Cases that reach the Court are rarely clear cut –This forces justices to draw on previous cases for decisions – »Utilize their own political values and understanding of public good

Supreme Court Principles Guiding Court Decisions Arguable that the Supreme Court has the Ultimate power –Interprets the constitution & laws of the land »Begs the question – ‘how can we justify giving non-elected individuals so much power?’ –Multiple scholars have attempted answer this question »Argument 1: Supreme Court relies on elected branches of gov to enforce the law »The Supreme Court is weak due to its dependency on other branches »Argument 2: Supreme Court subject to public opinion »Helps to influence decisions that are unpopular Criteria for cases to reach the Supreme Court –Examine how the authoritarian institution exists in a democratic society »7 aspects of the Supreme Court –Stare Decis –Court bases it decision on previous court decisions »Court has to justify their decisions – an attempt to keep law consistent and remove political nature –Political Question – Court may not hear a case due to its political nature »Refuse’s to hear cases that should be dealt with by other branches –Ripeness – Court hears cases that are ‘ripe’ or received a lot of petitions to be heard »Affirmative action, abortion, freedom of religion, etc..

Supreme Court –Moot-ness -Any case decided by no legal or non- judicial action or unnecessary to hear the case »Reverse discrimination cases –No Advisory Opinions – only hears cases where there is real conflict between two parties »Court doesn’t give advice on constitutional questions –Standing - Legal rights to challenge judicial decisions »Court will not rule unless there is standing »Party must demonstrate that they have a case to influence the court –Rule of Favor – Justices hear petitions every Monday which they confirm or deny »Justices (the Court) will hear petitions for court cases and chose those that meet the following above criteria »Four of the nine justices must agree on the petition to hear the case Technicalities of Court Decision’s 7 components of a court decision –Facts, question, rule, reasoning (majority), dissent, concurring decision, dicta

Supreme Court Components of a Court Decision –Facts A writ of certiorari – all records of the case are sent to the Court –Question Every case heard must raise a Constitutional question –‘Did the law that passed by the state legislature conflict with the 1 st Amendment right of the freedom of speech?’ –Rule (s) Rule of law – how the majority of the court answer the question –Sometimes the courts will have multiple rulings and strike down parts of a law or actions –There is typically some test offered in the rule of law (e.g. Neutrality Test, Balancing Test, Lemon Test) –Reasoning (majority) Provides the answer as to why the court ruled the way they did Citing of previous decisions of the courts and the interpretations of their meanings –Dissent Those who opposed the ruling of the majority are give opportunity to explain their reasoning Importance of dissent that often dissent will many years later be turned into law –(e.g. Justice Harlan’s dissent in the 1898 Plessy vs. Ferguson case) –Concurring Decision Where a justice agrees with the rule of the law of the majority – but disagree with the reasoning of the majority –Dicta The political or historical ideology or argument made by a court justice Dicta has no force as a rule of law