judiciary !

role of s.c

• final court of appeal

• interprets constitution through judicial review

• creates legal precedents

• protects rights, liberties and principles set out in const

• checks power of exec and congress

SUPREME COURT IS INDEPENDENT

• lifetime appointments - tenure

• appointment process- ensures vetted by both exec and congress- non partisan

• salary protections- in const- protect economic manipulation

• limited impeachment and removal- high threshold so judges arent subject to arbitrary dismissal

• control over case selection- manage workload and choose without external pressure

• judicial review

• seperation powers- cant hold position in congress or exec

judicial restraint

• encourage judges to limit own power stick to const

• obergefell v hodges- roberts criticized majority and not explicitly state sin const

• NFIB v sebelius- upheld affordable care act- upheld restraint by avoiding broad ruling which lead to detabilise power

SUPREME COURT ISN’T INDEPENDENT

• candidates are appointed and confirmed based on political agendas

• there has been executive criticisms of court decisions

• court is being used by pressure groups to change laws

• court is increasingly involved in political debates

• bush v gore 2000 directly involved courts in political process

• many justices have worked in political sphere or clear connections to political parties

appointment process

• vacancy occurs

• short list is drawn up w advice from judiciary committee, white house staff, justice department

• short list are background checked by FBI

• candidates interviewed by president

• public announcement

• rating given by ABA standing committee on federal judiciary

• hearings held by senate judiciary committee

• senate judiciary committee votes on whether to recommend further action

• senate debates

• floor vote in senate

strengths of appointment process

• thorough vetting into past and qual

• involves check and balances

• promote diversity

• lifetime tenure ensures ideoendence

• demoratic

weaknesses of appointment process

• politicisation by president-

• politicisation by senate- used to be confirmed w overhwleming suppport- scalia 1986 98-0- all now party lines - merrick garland

• unpredictable vacancies- obama 2 in 8 years - trump 3 In 4 years

• less qualififed candidates due to political compromises

• extremely partisan

reasons why pres chooses candidates

• ideological alignment - barrett

• liklehood for nomination -jackson appealed to moderates and progressives

• legal qual and experience - kagan first female solicitor general

• demographic considerations - jackson- rcial diversity women

• current composition and needs of the court - barrett 48 young age - long term influence

conservative justices

• originalist- republican- limit abortion and affirm action

• chief justice john roberts- bush

• samuel alito- bush- confirmation close reflecting partisan

• clarence thomas- bush - intense deabte- sexual assual allegations- narrow margin

• neil gorsuch- trump- refusal obama- cons titlt

• brett kavanaugh- trump- sexual assualt, public scrutiny- slimmest margin in history

• amy coney barrett- trump- soldiifed cons- days before election

liberal justices

• champion abortion, liberties, affirm action

• living constitutionalist

• sonia sotomayor- obama- first latina- vocal advocacy civil rights and criminal jsutice reform- step diversity

• elena kagan- obama- lack experience but solciitor general- confirmed by majority

• kentanji jackson- first black women- biden- extensive legal experience - strong liberal voice

living constitution theory

• still living and therefore open to new interpretations

• loose constructionist give greater interpretations and go beyond words

• framers kept it vague to allow it to evolve

• role is to modernise s.c

• liberal

orginalists theory

• should only consider original intentions of the framers

• a dead document not open to interpretations

• strict constituionalist approach to stick closely to original consittution

• courts role is to maintain 1788 beliefs to modern america

• cons

power of judicial review

• marbury v madison 1803

• interpret meaning of constitution

• strike down gov actions

• strike down legislation

• strike down state laws and actions

• effectively amend constitution

power of judicial review is controversial

• no expressley stated in constitution

• s.c granted itself the power in madbury v madison 1803 and fletcher v peck 1810

• undermines principle separation powers

• gives too much power to unelected and unaccountable judges

• some justices generally liberals have been criticised for judicial activism- interpret constitution in a new way ‘legislating from the bench

• cons justices practice judicial restraint- avoiding overturning legal precedents

landmark rulings

- brown v board education topeka- 1954- right student not segregated by race

- griswold v connecticut- 1965- right to use contraceptives within marriage

-miranda v arizona - 1966- 5th amendment right when questioned by police

-loving v virginia- 1967- state laws on interracial marriage declared unconstitutional

- roe v wade - 1973- right to an abortion in first 2 trimesters

- obergefell v hodges- 2015- right of same sex marriage

- express v zarda - 2020- right of employees not discriminated for sexual orientation

judgements advanced liberal values

• civil rights act

• obergefell v hodges

• roe v wade

• zarda v altitude express- cannot be discriminated based on sexual orientation- follows from bostock v clayton county

• use 14th amendment in riley v california extend to digital

uk v us

Explain and analyse three criticisms of the Supreme Court

P1- lack of democratic accountability- unelected- bush v gore decision 2000- lifetime appointments remove incentives for justices to align with public opinion.- structure can be seen as undemocratic and disconnected from voter influence.

P2-politicization - barrett 2020 viewed as heavily partisan- Court’s rulings reflect ideological biases rather than impartial legal reasoning.- erosion of courts independence- appoitnment process

P3- judicial overreach- create laws not interpret them- roe v wade 1973 criticized for bypassing legislative process- undermines seperation of powers- bush v gore- gave self judicial review

Explain and analyse three ways in which judicial independence is maintained

P1- life tenure- ensures that judges are not swayed by political pressure or fear of losing their position, as seen in landmark rulings like Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which desegregated schools despite opposition.- enables judges to make impartial rulings without fear of retaliation.

P2- protection from salary changes- gov are unable to exert influence through economic pressure, reinforcing impartiality in their rulings. For example, this measure is enshrined in Article III of the U.S. Constitution.- restricts political manipuation

P3- appointment process and safeguards- processes designed to assess legal expertise rather than political loyalty.- how fair and transparent appointment processes help maintain an independent judiciary

Explain and analyse the limits of the Supreme Court’s power

P1- dependence o other branches- Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which ordered school desegregation, resistance from Southern states delayed implementation until federal action, such as Eisenhower deploying troops to enforce integration in Little Rock, Arkansas.- Court’s authority can be limited by the willingness of other branches

P2- congressional power- Oregon v. Mitchell (1970), Congress passed the 26th Amendment, lowering the voting age to 18, overriding the Court's split decision.- legislative powers can curtail or reverse the Court’s influence.

P3- public opinion- influenced by societal attitudes and fears of losing legitimacy.- Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022) reflect shifting public and political pressures on controversial issues. Justices may tailor decisions to avoid public backlash or maintain the Court's credibility.- public opinion indirectly influences

Explain and analyse the role of judicial restraint in the US judiciary.

P1-uphold seperation powers- Judges practicing restraint avoid striking down laws passed by Congress or executive actions unless there is a clear violation of the Constitution.- Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014), the Court deferred to Congress’s decision on healthcare policy- Judicial restraint ensures that the judiciary respects the roles of the legislative and executive branches

P2-respect precedent- Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), the Court upheld Roe v. Wade despite criticisms, following the principle of stare decisis.- encourages judicial consistency by respecting prior rulings and avoiding unnecessary disruption

P3- limit judicial activism- limits decisions based on opinion- Missouri v. Jenkins (1995), the Court displayed restraint by refusing to impose a solution to a desegregation issue, leaving the task to local authorities.- limits the judiciary’s power, ensuring it does not overreach by deciding cases that involve policy-making better left to elected officials.

Explain and analyse how the Supreme Court has shaped civil rights in the United States

P1- desegregation- brown v board- challenged institutional racism and paved the way for further desegregation in other public services- instrumental in advancing civil rights by challenging racial segregation and setting a legal precedent

P2- protect voting rights- Voting Rights Act of 1965- key to expanding access to voting for minorities.- however shelby county reduced this- role in both advancing and limiting civil rights, demonstrating its complex relationship

P3- same sex marriage- obergefell v hodges- ignificant shift toward equality for LGBTQ+- reinforced the Court's role in expanding civil rights protections for historically marginalized groups- equality under the law

Explain and analyse the significance of judicial review in the US political system

P1- uphold constitution- ensure that laws and executive actions comply with the U.S. Constitution- brown v baord used judicial review to overturn state laws that allowed racial segregation in public schools, emphasizing the importance of the Constitution's guarantees of equal protection. - uphold equality and integrity of const

P2- checks and balances- judicial review was crucial in United States v. Nixon (1974), where the Court forced President Nixon to comply with a subpoena for tapes related to the Watergate scandal- affirmed the principle that even the executive is not above the law, demonstrating the Court's role in maintaining checks and balances.

P3- influence public policy- interpreting the Constitution in ways that shape societal norms and political practices.- Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize abortion in all states through its interpretation of the right to privacy had a profound impact on U.S. politics and public policy- significant role of judicial review in not only interpreting the Constitution but also in influencing broader societal and political changes.

Explain and analyse how the Supreme Court acts as a check on the other branches of government

P1- legislative- strike down laws passed by Congress that violate the Constitution Marbury v madison- United States v. Lopez (1995), where the Court ruled that a federal law banning guns near schools exceeded Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause.- check the legislative branch by ensuring laws align with constitutional

P2- executive actions- judicial review was crucial in United States v. Nixon (1974), where the Court forced President Nixon to comply with a subpoena for tapes related to the Watergate scandal- trump action including many immigration policies havent been approved but trump continues to act however

P3- check exec appointment powers- NLRB v. Noel Canning (2014), the Court ruled that President Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional because they violated the Senate’s power- president’s actions do not overstep the boundaries set by the Constitution

Explain and analyse the role of the Supreme Court in interpreting the Constitution

P1- judicial review- marbury v madison gave rights- roe v wade court interpreted in constitution extends womens rights- allows it to interpret the Constitution’s principles in response to evolving societal norms and issue

P2- expanding rights- brown v board education- interpreted the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to declare that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional- the Court shapes American society by interpreting constitutional clauses

P3- adapting to modern contexts- obergefell v hodges- interpreted the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, adapting constitutional principles to modern understandings of equality and marriage rights.- remains a living document

Explain and analyse three aspects of selection and appointment of Supreme Court justices

P1- presidential nomination- nominates a candidate based on their judicial philosophy, political ideology, and sometimes their legal qualifications- Trump barrett- driven to solidify conservative court- President plays a significant role in shaping the ideological direction of the Court

P2- senate confirmation- Senate Judiciary Committee, followed by a full Senate vote.- Senate refused to confirm Merrick Garland’s nomination in 2016 during President Obama’s final year in office- scrutinize a nominee’s qualifications, judicial record, and ideological leanings- Senate influences the selection of justices

P3- Political and Ideological Considerations- Presidents and Senators often seek nominees whose views align with their party’s agenda- ideological shift in the Court after President Trump appointed three justices, solidifying a conservative majority- process is not purely based on qualifications but is often deeply entangled with partisan politics

3 ways judicial review is important

• ensures all gov action in line w const - safeguards rights

• critical check on branches

• allow const to evolve w societal changes

3 ways judicial review isnt important

• not in const - gave to self- marbury v madfison

• judicial overreach - bush v gore

• relies heavily on subjected interpretation of judges

examples of appointment process

• Kentanji brown jackson- scrutinised her past public defender role, ruling in child porn cases and defense of guantanamo bay detainees

• amy coney barrett- criticised healthcare and abortion views - changes ideology of court- rushed hearrings

• brett kavanaugh- - allegations sexual assualt highschool and college- division - 50-48 won- controversial

• merrick garland- obama nomination- denied- great record- repub controlled senate- highlights issues politics

recent cases

• reporductive rights- dobbs v jackson- overturn roe v wade

• religious freedom- fulton v philadelphia- violated 1st amend when froze contract of catholic foster care for not allowing same sex couples- allows more religious expression - sides due to cons

• voting rights- bronvich v dnc 2021- discard ballots cast outside of designated precinct- affects race- upheld voting laws - chnages to gerrynmandering

• gun rights- new york state rife and pistol assoc v bruen 2022- ny restrictive gun permit law violated 2nd amen- expansive Interp 2nd amend

• enviornemnt- sackett v enviorn protec agency 2023- chnages jurisdictaion over wetland- limit regukatory power over businesses

judicial activism

• rulings suspected to be base don personal or political bias - broad interpretation, overturn precendent and expanding rigths further than const

examples of judicial axctivism

• brown v topeka- bold chnage - active role in guaranteeing rights

• miranda v arizona- courts willingness to actively intervene in cirminal jsutice

• roe v wade- critics argue went beyond const- far reaching decision

• district of columbia v heller 2008- coumbia band on andguns and need triger locks violated 2nd amend- expoanded gun rights too far

• citizen united v fec 2010- overturned decades of campaign regulation - far reaching conseuqences

• dobbs v jackson- reflected cons beliefs - dire consequences

• shelby counter v holder- removed provisions voting rights act- gave states rihts- led to many ID laws

• affirmative action ruling - student for fair admission v harvard- ruled affirmative action unconst- overturned numerous precedents- cons leaning

3/4 ways arguments for judicial activism

• allows necessary adaptation- keep pace w changes

• protects rights- safeguard againat policies

• helps to fill legislative gaps- if laws fail to address specific issues - facebook v fuguid 2021- clarified definitions which original 1991 ruling couldnt

• allows for correction of injsutices - brown v board education

¾ arguemnts against judicial activism

• undermines sep powers and democracy- overreach

• creates legal insatbility and unpredictability- undermines legal certainty- changing of precedents

• encoursages bias and subjectivity- undermines impartiality- eroding public trust