Knowt
Note
Studied by 101 peopleNoteStudied by 254 peopleNoteStudied by 11 peopleNoteStudied by 15 peopleNoteStudied by 13 peopleNoteStudied by 48 people
nature and role of the supreme court
in the constitution…
Article III, section 1
Establishes the existence of a Supreme Court
Establishes that justices are appointed for life.
Article III, section 2
The court can determine the outcome of all cases brought to it under the Constitution.
The president nominates all justices which have to be ratified by the Senate.
Other parts of the constitution allow Congress to establish the structure of lower courts, and establish the total number of justices (this has been kept at 9 since the Civil War)
judicial independence in the constitution
Separation of Powers
It is not possible to be a member of the executive or legislature and be a judge simultaneously.
Salary
The constitution guarantees that a justice’s pay cannot be reduced during their time in office. They do not fear negative consequences if they make decisions against President or Congress.
Security of tenure
Judges are appointed for life. They can only be removed via impeachment. The President can only appoint when there is a vacancy.
Appointment Process
Appointments have to be scrutinised and voted on by the Senate.
Stage | Explanation | Example: New York Pistol and Rifle Association v. Bruen (2022) |
A case is presented to the court. | 7,000-8,000 cases are presented each year – of which 70ish cases are held per year. The court can choose which of those cases to hear. The court cannot initiate its own cases. | This case originated in the lower courts in 2018 when the NRA challenged a New York law. The law required someone to have to demonstrate a specific need to carry a gun in public, otherwise carrying a gun in public is banned. |
All nine justices hear the oral arguments of the case. | Like a criminal court, there is a plaintiff and a defendant. Justices will hear legal arguments and be able to ask questions. | During the 2h session both sides presented their case. Justices referred to different interpretations of the Second Amendment and recent gun cases determined by the court. |
All nine justices will consider the case privately on both individual and group basis. They eventually deliver a majority opinion. | The majority opinion is a written document which explains in detail the way in which the Constitution has or has not been broken. | In July 2022 the Court delivered a 6-3 majority verdict which overturned the gun restrictions. Authored by Justice Thomas he declared the second amendment provides an individual right to carry a gun, as established in DC v Heller (2008). The right should include public spaces, where there might be a particular need to defend oneself. The minority opinion written by Justice Breyer said that the right to carry a gun was not absolute, citing the importance of allowing states to be able to determine their own gun laws. |
The majority ruling can overturn the actions of any institution, including the President and Congress. | This final decision is often referred to as judicial review | This overturned the New York law which has been in place since 1911 and also suggests that several other states, such as Maryland and Hawaii, will need to overturn their own gun restriction laws. |
judicial review process
It’s the process by which the court determines whether the Constitution has been broken.
The court has the power to overturn the actions of any other institution, if, in the eyes of the court, they have broken the Constitution.
Thus, the Supreme Court has the final say in all constitutional cases.
The constitution is not clear on the extent of Supreme Court power.
In Marbury v Madison (1803) the court declared it has the power of judicial review and could overturn Congress.
In Fletcher v Peck (1810) they also determined they had the power to overturn state law.
It is a largely settled idea that, in making the Constitution itself supreme and giving the court the power to rule on constitutional issues, the court has the final say. It could be argued, however, that this is not apparent in the Constitution, but was a power the court assumed for itself.
Background:
Case: Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court could issue a writ of mandamus (an order to compel an official to perform a duty) to force the delivery of judicial appointments made by President Adams but not delivered before he left office.
Key Figures:
William Marbury: A "midnight judge" appointed by President Adams.
James Madison: Secretary of State under President Jefferson, who withheld Marbury's commission.
Chief Justice John Marshall: Head of the Supreme Court and key figure in the ruling.
Decision:
The Court ruled that Marbury had a right to his commission but that the specific law granting the Court the power to issue writs of mandamus was unconstitutional.
Establishing Judicial Review: Marshall's opinion established the principle of judicial review—the power of the Court to review and potentially overturn laws passed by Congress or actions by the executive branch if they are deemed unconstitutional.
Significance:
Judicial Review: For the first time, the Court explicitly declared its power to invalidate laws or actions of the government that conflict with the Constitution. This established the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government with the ability to check the other branches.
Strengthened the Court's Role: By asserting its authority to strike down laws, the Court solidified its role as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.
Limited Congressional Power: The decision showed that even laws passed by Congress could be overturned if they violated the Constitution.
Precedent: The case set a precedent for future judicial review cases, shaping the relationship between the branches of government.
Key Legal Principles:
Constitutional Supremacy: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any law inconsistent with it is void.
Role of the Judiciary: The judiciary has a duty to interpret the Constitution and ensure that laws passed by Congress align with it.
Impact:
Marbury v. Madison is considered one of the foundational cases for American constitutional law and underscores the importance of the judiciary in preserving the Constitution's principles.
appointments
Why could some appointments be described as:
Limited: if nominee has narrow impact on the ideological balance of the institution. For example, replacing a justice or official with a similar ideological leaning doesn't significantly shift the dynamics. Additionally, "limited" may refer to appointments that are constrained by factors like lack of Senate support, controversies, or temporary roles
Moderate: individuals who are centrists or compromise candidates. These appointees may not heavily favor one ideological side, which can lead to balanced decision-making. Presidents sometimes choose moderates to ensure confirmation in a divided Senate or to maintain a level of bipartisanship.
High: if they result in a significant ideological shift, dramatically altering the balance of power in an institution like the Supreme Court. These appointments often involve replacing a centrist with an ideologue or significantly altering the majority composition.
Why, therefore, was the first presidency of Donald Trump so significant?
his ability to appoint three Supreme Court justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. These appointments shifted the Court to a solid conservative majority (6-3), impacting decisions on major issues like abortion, gun rights, and religious freedom. His appointments are considered "high" in impact because they cemented a conservative judicial philosophy for potentially decades. This aligns with his broader influence in reshaping the federal judiciary by appointing over 200 federal judges.
Who currently sits in the Supreme Court?
John Roberts (Chief Justice) – Conservative-leaning, appointed by George W. Bush.
Clarence Thomas – Conservative, appointed by George H.W. Bush.
Samuel Alito – Conservative, appointed by George W. Bush.
Sonia Sotomayor – Liberal, appointed by Barack Obama.
Elena Kagan – Liberal, appointed by Barack Obama.
Neil Gorsuch – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Brett Kavanaugh – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Amy Coney Barrett – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Ketanji Brown Jackson – Liberal, appointed by Joe Biden.
nature and role of the supreme court
in the constitution…
Article III, section 1
Establishes the existence of a Supreme Court
Establishes that justices are appointed for life.
Article III, section 2
The court can determine the outcome of all cases brought to it under the Constitution.
The president nominates all justices which have to be ratified by the Senate.
Other parts of the constitution allow Congress to establish the structure of lower courts, and establish the total number of justices (this has been kept at 9 since the Civil War)
judicial independence in the constitution
Separation of Powers
It is not possible to be a member of the executive or legislature and be a judge simultaneously.
Salary
The constitution guarantees that a justice’s pay cannot be reduced during their time in office. They do not fear negative consequences if they make decisions against President or Congress.
Security of tenure
Judges are appointed for life. They can only be removed via impeachment. The President can only appoint when there is a vacancy.
Appointment Process
Appointments have to be scrutinised and voted on by the Senate.
Stage | Explanation | Example: New York Pistol and Rifle Association v. Bruen (2022) |
A case is presented to the court. | 7,000-8,000 cases are presented each year – of which 70ish cases are held per year. The court can choose which of those cases to hear. The court cannot initiate its own cases. | This case originated in the lower courts in 2018 when the NRA challenged a New York law. The law required someone to have to demonstrate a specific need to carry a gun in public, otherwise carrying a gun in public is banned. |
All nine justices hear the oral arguments of the case. | Like a criminal court, there is a plaintiff and a defendant. Justices will hear legal arguments and be able to ask questions. | During the 2h session both sides presented their case. Justices referred to different interpretations of the Second Amendment and recent gun cases determined by the court. |
All nine justices will consider the case privately on both individual and group basis. They eventually deliver a majority opinion. | The majority opinion is a written document which explains in detail the way in which the Constitution has or has not been broken. | In July 2022 the Court delivered a 6-3 majority verdict which overturned the gun restrictions. Authored by Justice Thomas he declared the second amendment provides an individual right to carry a gun, as established in DC v Heller (2008). The right should include public spaces, where there might be a particular need to defend oneself. The minority opinion written by Justice Breyer said that the right to carry a gun was not absolute, citing the importance of allowing states to be able to determine their own gun laws. |
The majority ruling can overturn the actions of any institution, including the President and Congress. | This final decision is often referred to as judicial review | This overturned the New York law which has been in place since 1911 and also suggests that several other states, such as Maryland and Hawaii, will need to overturn their own gun restriction laws. |
judicial review process
It’s the process by which the court determines whether the Constitution has been broken.
The court has the power to overturn the actions of any other institution, if, in the eyes of the court, they have broken the Constitution.
Thus, the Supreme Court has the final say in all constitutional cases.
The constitution is not clear on the extent of Supreme Court power.
In Marbury v Madison (1803) the court declared it has the power of judicial review and could overturn Congress.
In Fletcher v Peck (1810) they also determined they had the power to overturn state law.
It is a largely settled idea that, in making the Constitution itself supreme and giving the court the power to rule on constitutional issues, the court has the final say. It could be argued, however, that this is not apparent in the Constitution, but was a power the court assumed for itself.
Background:
Case: Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court could issue a writ of mandamus (an order to compel an official to perform a duty) to force the delivery of judicial appointments made by President Adams but not delivered before he left office.
Key Figures:
William Marbury: A "midnight judge" appointed by President Adams.
James Madison: Secretary of State under President Jefferson, who withheld Marbury's commission.
Chief Justice John Marshall: Head of the Supreme Court and key figure in the ruling.
Decision:
The Court ruled that Marbury had a right to his commission but that the specific law granting the Court the power to issue writs of mandamus was unconstitutional.
Establishing Judicial Review: Marshall's opinion established the principle of judicial review—the power of the Court to review and potentially overturn laws passed by Congress or actions by the executive branch if they are deemed unconstitutional.
Significance:
Judicial Review: For the first time, the Court explicitly declared its power to invalidate laws or actions of the government that conflict with the Constitution. This established the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government with the ability to check the other branches.
Strengthened the Court's Role: By asserting its authority to strike down laws, the Court solidified its role as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution.
Limited Congressional Power: The decision showed that even laws passed by Congress could be overturned if they violated the Constitution.
Precedent: The case set a precedent for future judicial review cases, shaping the relationship between the branches of government.
Key Legal Principles:
Constitutional Supremacy: The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and any law inconsistent with it is void.
Role of the Judiciary: The judiciary has a duty to interpret the Constitution and ensure that laws passed by Congress align with it.
Impact:
Marbury v. Madison is considered one of the foundational cases for American constitutional law and underscores the importance of the judiciary in preserving the Constitution's principles.
appointments
Why could some appointments be described as:
Limited: if nominee has narrow impact on the ideological balance of the institution. For example, replacing a justice or official with a similar ideological leaning doesn't significantly shift the dynamics. Additionally, "limited" may refer to appointments that are constrained by factors like lack of Senate support, controversies, or temporary roles
Moderate: individuals who are centrists or compromise candidates. These appointees may not heavily favor one ideological side, which can lead to balanced decision-making. Presidents sometimes choose moderates to ensure confirmation in a divided Senate or to maintain a level of bipartisanship.
High: if they result in a significant ideological shift, dramatically altering the balance of power in an institution like the Supreme Court. These appointments often involve replacing a centrist with an ideologue or significantly altering the majority composition.
Why, therefore, was the first presidency of Donald Trump so significant?
his ability to appoint three Supreme Court justices: Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett. These appointments shifted the Court to a solid conservative majority (6-3), impacting decisions on major issues like abortion, gun rights, and religious freedom. His appointments are considered "high" in impact because they cemented a conservative judicial philosophy for potentially decades. This aligns with his broader influence in reshaping the federal judiciary by appointing over 200 federal judges.
Who currently sits in the Supreme Court?
John Roberts (Chief Justice) – Conservative-leaning, appointed by George W. Bush.
Clarence Thomas – Conservative, appointed by George H.W. Bush.
Samuel Alito – Conservative, appointed by George W. Bush.
Sonia Sotomayor – Liberal, appointed by Barack Obama.
Elena Kagan – Liberal, appointed by Barack Obama.
Neil Gorsuch – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Brett Kavanaugh – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Amy Coney Barrett – Conservative, appointed by Donald Trump.
Ketanji Brown Jackson – Liberal, appointed by Joe Biden.
NoteStudied by 101 peopleNoteStudied by 254 peopleNoteStudied by 11 peopleNoteStudied by 15 peopleNoteStudied by 13 peopleNoteStudied by 48 people