US judiciary

chief justice

John Roberts, republican

example of SC justice

Elena Kagan, democrat

role of chief justice

decides which justice for which case, can influence outcome

how has SCOTUS become too political?

president picks, senate confirmation, media, landmark rulings, interprets law, decides extent of federalism

ratio of conservative to liberal justices

6:3

who is the swing justice

Robert Kavanaugh

loose interpretation example

Roe V Wade 1970

strict interpretation example

DC V Heller

advantages to loos interpretations

modern rulings allow evolvement and representation

disadvantages to loose interpretations

too activist, changes original interpretation of the constitution, too much power to unelected judges

advantages to strict interpretations

allows people who are elated (like congress) to hang interpretation, enhances democracy

disadvantages to strict interpretations

prevents change

arguments FOR activism

minority protection, check on other branches, keeps constitution relevant, prevents gridlock

arguments FOR restraint

judges are unelected, constitution sovereign, prevents judges overstepping, less accountability, provides stability on rulings (like Roe V wade overturned)

Brunell V Hobby Lobby

2014, ruled that companies are not required to provide health insurance to those with opposing religious beliefs. Freedom of religion act

Citizens V Federal election committee

2010, government cant restrict independent political spending, Freedom of Speech

Base V Rees

2008ndeath penalty is not a cruel and unusual punishment. impacts federalism

Marbury V Madison

established judicial review, SCOTUS is powerful because of checks on other branches

example of check on president: US v Texas

Obama cannot delay deportation of illegal immigrants

landmark rulings ABORTION

Roe V Wade 1970, loose, legalised abortion BUT Dobbs V Jackson health reversed, strict. impacted federalism

landmark rulings Brown V board of education

1954, outlawed segregation in schools

landmark rulings Miranda V Arizona

1966, rights have to explained and access to lawyer when arrested

landmark rulings Texas V Johnston

allowed Johnston to burn US flag under freedom of speech, went against federalism prohibiting vandalism to flag

landmark rulings DC v Heller

2008, right to firearm in DC, limited federalism

what do landmark rulings show about SCOTUS

interpret constitution, federalism, quasi-legislative powers, protecting rights

SCOTUS IS good at protecting rights

landmark rulings, free speech, privacy, discrimination, criminal justice

SCOTUS ISNT good at protecting rights

controversial, inconsistent, erosion of campaign regulations

campaign finance today

can spend unlimited money from personal income caps on direct donations, no limits on funding for attack ads, can get matching caps on funds if both agree

why is deregulation on campaign finance weakening democracy?

most candidates with the most money won (BUT Kamala Harris V Trump), more money = greater infulence, can lead to corruption

example of SC check on executive

US V Texas dreamer generation, cannot give 2nd generation immigrates permission to not be deported

example of SC check on congress

US v Lopes, ruled against congress allowing schools to prevent guns

checks on SCOUTUS

congress approves justices, executive nominates justices

similarities w uk HISTORY

separate from government, legitimacy through landmark rulings

similarities w uk CHARACTERISTICS

scrutiny of candidates, lack of diversity, tenure, conservative = restrained

similarities w uk POWERS

final court of appeal, judicial review

civil liberties

freedoms of an individual

civil rights

ensuring equality and no discrimination