(13) Judicial Decisions: Crash Course Government and Politics #22

Overview of Supreme Court Decision-Making

  • Justices operate independently but are influenced by various external factors.

  • Decisions are made in an office context, not in isolation.

Influences on Justices

Congressional Influence

  • Justices recognize that Congress can respond to Supreme Court decisions by passing new laws, especially if the ruling does not involve the Constitution directly.

Presidential Influence

  • Minimal influence post-confirmation; however, lower court justices may navigate political relationships due to aspirations for Supreme Court positions.

  • Justices may rule in ways that align with potential presidential nominations.

  • Political affiliations rarely determine the selection of justices (e.g., a Democratic president selecting a Republican judge is uncommon).

Historical Context

  • Precedent: Principles of precedent and stare decisis limit available decisions for justices.

  • Awareness of Legacy: Justices consider the historical impact of their decisions, referring to landmark cases (e.g., Dred Scott, Brown v. Board, Roe v. Wade).

Judicial Behavior & Strategic Decision-Making

Decision Implementation

  • Justices consider how their decisions may be implemented by the executive branch.

  • Decisions may lay groundwork for future legal changes.

Political Ideology

  • Justices can be influenced by their liberal or conservative ideologies.

  • Political affiliation plays a role in the selection process but can diverge from expected judicial behavior (e.g., David Souter).

Judicial Philosophies

Judicial Activism

  • Active role in policymaking; examines broader social implications.

  • Often associated with overturning Congressional legislation.

  • Typically linked to liberal justices but not exclusively.

Judicial Restraint

  • Emphasizes adherence to precedent; prefers incremental change.

  • Confused with originalism but often influenced more by precedent than by the Constitution's original text.

  • Usually associated with conservative ideology but not strictly.

Historical Trends in Judicial Philosophy

  • Judicial Activism: Prominent during the 1950s-1970s with notable achievements in civil rights and privacy.

  • Judicial Restraint: Dominant from the 1980s to the early 2000s, focusing on limiting government power and restoring states' authority.

Contemporary Court Dynamics

  • Current Roberts Court exhibits both liberal and conservative justices, with a tendency toward activism in some conservative rulings (e.g., Citizens United, Voting Rights Act invalidation).

  • Tension exists where justices claim to exercise restraint while demonstrating activism in politically sensitive cases.

Recap and Key Points

  1. Judicial philosophy is distinct from political ideology; activism vs. restraint is not synonymous with liberalism vs. conservatism.

  2. Multiple complex factors influence judicial decisions; expect political implications in Supreme Court rulings.