Chapter 4 - 3/7 - The Supreme Court and public policy

Question 1

What did the Founding Fathers do to try and ensure the judiciary remained free from political pressure?

Answer 1

• Life tenure
• Security of salary

Question 2

What is an activist court?

Answer 2

One that sees itself as leading the way in the reform of US society.

Question 3

How did Professor Lino Graglia define judicial activism?

Answer 3

‘the practice by judges of disallowing policy…that the Constitution does not clearly prohibit’

Question 4

When was the case of ‘Brown v Board of Education of Topeka’?

Answer 4

1954

Question 5

What did the case of ‘Brown v Board of Education of Topeka’ do?

Answer 5

Outlawed racial segregation in public schools.

Question 6

What is the case of ‘Brown v Board of Education of Topeka’ seen as an example of?

Answer 6

Judicial activism

Question 7

When was ‘Roe v Wade’?

Answer 7

1973

Question 8

What did ‘Roe v Wade’ do?

Answer 8

Declared a woman’s right to an abortion to be a constitutionally protected right.

Question 9

What is the case of ‘Roe v Wade’ an example of?

Answer 9

Judicial activism

Question 10

How do activist judges view the court in relation to the other branches of state?

Answer 10

As an equal partner.

Question 11

When was ‘Obergefell v Hodges’?

Answer 11

2015

Question 12

What did ‘Obergefell v Hodges’ do?

Answer 12

Legalised same-sex marriage.

Question 13

What is ‘Obergefell v Hodges’ an example of?

Answer 13

Judicial activism

Question 14

How did T. R. van Geel describe the attitude of activist judges?

Answer 14

“I’m in charge, and I will seek to be a player equal to the other branches in shaping policy”

Question 15

What is meant by Imperial Judiciary?

Answer 15

The view that the courts have become too powerful through their powers of judicial review and impact on public policy.

Question 16

How did Kermit Roosevelt describe critics of judicial activism in 2006?

Answer 16

‘People call the Court activist because they disagree with its decisions.’

Question 17

What is meant by judicial restraint?

Answer 17

When the Court is more inclined to accept the views and actions of elected officials.

Question 18

What is ‘stare decisis’?

Answer 18

A legal principle that judges should follow past precedents as a guide to rulings - associated with judicial restraint rather than activism.

Question 19

How do judges that practice judicial restraint see themselves?

Answer 19

As deferential to the legislature and the executive as they are not accountable to the voters.

Question 20

What is the criticism of judges who exercise restraint?

Answer 20

Taking a too narrow focus of a text that is over two centuries old limits the meaning and interpretations.

Question 21

What is the criticism of judicial activism?

Answer 21

• Their interpretations make them law makers.
• The updating of the Constitution by activism only updates it with the views of the Justices’ and not the country.
• Changes should be decided by Congress, not the courts.

Question 22

What is public policy?

Answer 22

The laws, regulations, and actions of the government that seek to make changes to society.

Question 23

What is the Supreme Court’s impact on public policy?

Answer 23

• Uphold existing policy
• Remove existing policy
• Establish new policy

Question 24

Give an example of the Supreme Court upholding existing public policy.

Answer 24

Trump v Hawaii

Question 25

When was Trump v Hawaii?

Answer 25

2018

Question 26

What had Trump done that prompted the case of Trump v Hawaii?

Answer 26

He had issued three bands vie executive orders on arrival from certain Muslim-majority countries due to terrorist concerns.

Question 27

What was the Supreme Court ruling of Trump v Hawaii?

Answer 27

They uphold Trump’s executive orders, ruling that he was justified in preventing people deemed detrimental to the interests of the USA from being allowed entry.

Question 28

Give an example of the Supreme Court removing existing public policy.

Answer 28

Citizens United v Federal Election Commission

Question 29

When was the case of Citizens United v Federal Election Commission?

Answer 29

2010

Question 30

What was the case of Citizens United v Federal Election Committee?

Answer 30

Citizens United wanted to air a film critical of Hilary Clinton but could not because interest groups were prevented from making election communication within 30 days of a primary.

Question 31

What was the result of the case of Citizens United v Federal Election Commission?

Answer 31

The Supreme Court ruled that the Act preventing election communication violated the First Amendment and struck down the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (2002).

Question 32

What Act prevented election communication within 30 days of a primary that was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2010?

Answer 32

The Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act 2002

Question 33

When was the Bipartisan Campaign reform Act?

Answer 33

2002

Question 34

What cases is an example of the Supreme Court establishing a new public policy?

Answer 34

• Roe v Wade 1973
• Obergefell v Hodges 2015