1. The Courts in Real Life

2. Popular Influence – Not Entirely Independent
Appointed by the President
Part of this is because they agree with his or her political ideology.
Even though they do not have to seek re- election, judges are chosen partly for specific political biases.

3. Popular Influence – Not Entirely Independent
Judges watch the news.
They follow elections, read papers, get mail from both sides of an argument.
They understand that their decisions either support or refute public opinion.
Justices are aware that decisions that flagrantly go against public opinion are likely to be ignored.
Dred Scott v. Sanford – infuriated the North, many did not follow it.

4. Conservatism and Liberalism
The Supreme Court under Earl Warren ( ) and Warren Burger ( ) made notably liberal decisions.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954); Roe v. Wade (1973).
When William Rehnquist became Chief Justice in 1989, the court became more conservative.
With the death of Rehnquist and retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor, George W. Bush’s appointments pushed the court further right.

5. Ideological Spectrum
The Supreme Court under Earl Warren ( ) and Warren Burger ( ) made notably liberal decisions.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954); Roe v. Wade (1973).
When William Rehnquist became Chief Justice in 1989, the court became more conservative.
With the death of Rehnquist and retirement of Sandra Day O’Connor, George W. Bush’s appointments pushed the court further right.

7. Conservatism and Liberalism
In 2009 Sonia Sotomayor’s confirmation didn’t substantially alter the ideological balance, as David Souter, who she replaced, was also more liberal-to-moderate.
Elena Kagan’s replacement of retiring John Paul Stevens also maintained a liberal-to-moderate seat.
Until recently, the court was balanced – 4 conservatives (John Roberts, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and Antonin Scalia), 4 moderate liberals (Ruth Ginsberg, Steven Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan) and one swing vote – Anthony Kennedy.

8. Constraints on Power – Self-Regulation
Despite Judicial Review, the courts operate under several constraints:
Based on an adversarial system – there must be two parties present opposing viewpoints before an impartial judge. It is from this struggle that justice, it is assumed, will emerge.
The case must represent a justiciable dispute – must be an actual case, not a hypothetical one.
The Court has developed a doctrine of political questions – if a decision is better handled by Congress or the President, the court generally does not get involved.

9. Constraints on Power – Checks an Balances
President appoints all federal judges.
Congress must confirm.
Congress could, by law, change the structure of the court system.
Congress impeaches justices.
Congress can amend the Constitution. Example – 16th Amendment allowed federal income tax after ruled unconstitutional by Supreme Court.

10. Restraint vs. Activism
The courts have the ability to direct national policy.
Judicial Restraint holds that judges should play a minimal role in policy-making.
Because the Supreme Court is the least democratic of the three branches, it should refrain as much as possible from creating policy.
Other branches should take the lead, as they are more closely connected to the people.

11. Restraint vs. Activism
Judicial Activism suggests that judges make policy and interpret the Constitution in new ways.
Federal courts must correct injustices that the President and Congress fail to address.
Minority rights must be protected by the courts, because the majority exert their will upon elected officials.
The Constitution must be loosely interpreted to meet the demands of the present.

12. Latin Words You Must Know - Certiorari
The only way the Supreme Court can get a case is if one of the parties asks it to issue a writ of certiorari.
This is actually a request from the Supreme Court to a lower court to send to them the record of the case for review.
More than 7,000 writs are asked of the court each year; only about 150 are granted.
Then, if 4 of the 9 Supreme Court Justices agree to take the case, the court will take the case (Rule of 4).

13. Latin Words You Must Know – Stare Decisis
“let the decision stand.”
The Court defers to previous Supreme Court rulings.
They apply precedent to current cases and rule based on past decisions.