02 - The Supreme Court

Judicial Review and Precedents

  • Judicial Review: The authority of the Supreme Court to determine the constitutionality of government actions.

  • Key Case: Marbury v. Madison (1803) established this principle under Chief Justice John Marshall.

  • Jurisdictions:

    • Original Jurisdiction: Powers to hear cases for the first time.

    • Appellate Jurisdiction: The ability to review lower court decisions and alter their outcomes.

Impact of Supreme Court Decisions

  • Courts influence public policy via constitutional interpretations.

  • Significant Cases:

    • Marbury v. Madison: Foundation for judicial review.

    • Dred Scott v. Sanford: Escalated tensions leading to Civil War.

    • Roe v. Wade: Challenged state abortion laws; later overturned by Dobbs.

Jurisdiction Specifics

  • Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction on cases involving multiple states or against ambassadors/public ministers.

  • However, the majority of cases are appeals from lower courts—only 1-2 original cases annually.

Case Acceptance Process

  • Approximately 8,000 cases appeal each year; only a few hundred are selected for consideration.

  • Rule of Four: At least 4 of the 9 justices must agree to hear a case.

  • If a case is not accepted, the lower court’s ruling prevails based on stare decisis (precedent).

Procedure for Reaching the Supreme Court

Steps to Appeal

  1. Case filed in Federal District Court.

  2. Appeals made to Federal Court of Appeals.

  3. Finally, a case may reach the Supreme Court.

  • Possible Outcomes:

    • The Supreme Court may rule, allow the lower court’s ruling to stand, or send it back for reconsideration.

Writ of Certiorari

  • Most cases arrive via Writ of Certiorari: a request for the Supreme Court to review a lower court ruling.

  • Certified Questions: When a lower court seeks clarification from the Supreme Court on a legal question.

Oral Arguments and Court Conference

Oral Arguments

  • Once a case is accepted, a hearing date is scheduled for both sides to present.

Briefs

  • Written documents submitted prior to oral arguments.

Court in Conference

  • Chief Justice leads discussions among justices on case views in private sessions.

Opinions of the Court

  • Following conferences, decisions are announced and opinions are drafted:

    • Majority Opinion: The Court’s final decision and its reasoning.

    • Precedents: These opinions act as legal standards for future cases.

    • Concurring Opinions: Justices adding or emphasizing points not covered in the majority opinion.

    • Dissenting Opinions: Written by justices who disagree with the majority opinion.

Composition of the Supreme Court

  • Comprised of 8 Associate Justices and 1 Chief Justice.

  • Justices are appointed for life by the President (or until retirement).

  • Historical appointments:

    • Voting patterns show that every president (except Carter) appointed at least one justice, impacting long-term political legacies.

Notable Justices and Their Appointments

  • Clarence Thomas: 1948, appointed 1991 by G.H.W. Bush.

  • John Roberts (Chief Justice): 1955, appointed 2005 by G.W. Bush.

  • Samuel Alito: 1950, appointed 2006 by G.W. Bush.

  • Sonia Sotomayor: 1954, appointed 2009 by Obama.

  • Elena Kagan: 1960, appointed 2010 by Obama.

  • Neil Gorsuch: 1967, appointed 2017 by Trump.

  • Brett Kavanaugh: 1965, appointed 2018 by Trump.

  • Amy Coney Barrett: 1972, appointed 2020 by Trump.

  • Ketanji Brown Jackson: 1970, appointed 2022 by Biden.

Landmark Appointments

  • First African American Justice: Thurgood Marshall (1967-1993).

  • First Woman Justice: Sandra Day O’Connor (1981-2006).

  • First Hispanic Justice: Sonia Sotomayor (2009).

Judicial Philosophy

  • Judicial Activism: An approach favoring the overturning of previous decisions and declaring laws unconstitutional.

  • Judicial Restraint: Preference for maintaining prior rulings and minimal judicial interference in legislation.

Discussion Questions

  • Evaluate the benefits and drawbacks of Judicial Activism versus Judicial Restraint.

  • Personal opinions on how judges should approach these differing philosophies.