Supreme Court and rights Flashcards
Background of the supreme court
9 members-1 Chief Justice, 8 associate justices
Number fixed by Congress, unchanged since 1869
Appointed by president, confirmed by senate by simple maj
Hold office for life ‘during good behaviour’
Powers of SC
Interpret consi (highest court of appeal)
Judicial review
Interpret laws to ensure they’re consi
Laws applied properly
Resolve disputes e.g consi, federal laws, treaties, disputes between states
SC and Consi
Judicial branch-A3
S1 sets out SC as only judicial power (all power in its hands)
Congress can ‘ordain and est’ new courts
Hold office in ‘good behaviour’
No mention of judicial activism (Change society e.g roe v wade, interpret creatively)
No provision for number of supreme court justices
Vague
Marbury v Madison 1803
Est judicial review and power to strike down federal law.
No consi basis for this-defined from all judicial power
Acts of congress, executive actions
Nowhere to appeal if struck down
Fletcher v Peck 1810
Extended judicial review to state laws
How does SCOTUS work?
Appellate court
4/9 justices must concur case is to be heard
Decisions made by maj. Majority and dissenting opinions given
Some votes unanimous
Only way to overturn decisions is to amend the constitution
Must petition for writ of cert
Categories: cases of national importance, lower court invalidates federal law, resolve split divisions in lower courts
SCOTUS Justices
All have ideological stance
Some presidents have more opportunity to appt than others (term lengths. 1 term-less likely)
Trump was lucky to appoint three. 1 as soon as he was sworn in, 1 as he was leaving office
Biden-appointed 1 due to retirement, ensured another liberal would get appointed
Balance should be 4 either side and 1 who can swing either way. Currently unbalanced-5 conservatives, 3 liberals
Party politics affect process
Ideology not always fixed, some can be unexpected
Biden: Justice Jackson
Promised to appoint a black female justice in 2020 election if he got the chance to
2022-Breyer retired, vacancy occurred
February-announced as nomination
Judiciary committee deadlocked 11-11 but her nomination advanced by a 53-47 vote in Senate (few republicans also voted for her)
Sworn in June 2022
Independent nature of SCOTUS
Separation of powers
Life tenure
Protected salary
Appointment process ensures suitably qualified justices are found
Judicial philosophy
Some judges have a philosophy that will influence how they reach their decision
Philosophy: strict and loose constructionist
Strict-constitution interpreted in literal/strict way, tend to be labelled as conservatives. Currently strict constructionist majority
Loose-read between lines, look at context of issue and consi, favour federal govt power, tend to be labelled liberals. eg Obergefell v Hodges
Judicial activism/restraint
Activism-usually loose constructionist, use position to promote desirable social ends. Activist courts have large docket (take on more cases)
Restraint: should not legislate from bench, leave to executive and legislature. Greater stress upon precedents from previous courts. Smaller docket (hear less)
Appointments process
Vacancy occurs
Search begins (can come from anywhere)
FBI checks and ABA approval
Senate hearings and confirmation
Appointments process strengths
Ensures judicial independence
Ensures individuals are qualified
Role of elected branches of government gives some democratic accountability
Appointments process weaknesses
Presidents tend to politicise process by choosing justices who share ideological views or ideas about justice e.g Trump-Kavanaugh
Senate tended to politicise process by focusing on hot button issues e.g women’s rights rather than qualifications of nominees
Members of SJC from president’s party tend to ask simple or soft questions. Opposition-embarrass nominee rather than elicit relevant info e.g Kavanaugh hearing
Justices frequently confirmed on party lines
Media conduct a feeding frenzy often connected with trivial or unrelated matters
Checks on congressional power
US v Lopez 1995 declared 1990 gun-free school zones act as unconstitutional
NFIB v Sebelius 2012-individual mandate of Obamacare could not be legislated by Congress, but could be allowed under congress’s power in same article to ‘lay and collect taxes’
Checks on presidential power
US v Nixon 1974-refusal to handover White House Tapes unconstitutional
Clinton v Paula Jones 1997-Clinton’s claim of immunity to prosecution in a sexual harassment case unconstitutional
Hamdan v Rumsfield 2006-military commissions set up by Bush to try Guantanamo Bays detainees to be unconstitutional (US bill of rights and constitution applies to sovereign territory)
Congress: checks on court
Has more due to it being frequently elected
Senate confirms nominations
House can impeach, senate can remove justices if found guilty
Alter number of justices in court
Initiate constitutional amendments thereby seeking to overturn judgements of the court with which it disagrees
President: checks on court
Nominates justices
Decide whether to throw his political weight behind court, or criticise it openly
Power of pardon
Bully pulpit e.g Biden criticised Roe v Wade reversal
Other checks on the court
No enforcement powers
No initiation powers
Public opinion
Some parts of constitution unambiguous and therefore not open to interpretation by the court
May check itself by reversing earlier decisions e.g 2000 Stenberg vs Carhart declared Nebraska state law prohibiting late-term abortion unconstitutional but in 2007 Gonzales vs Carhart upheld almost identical federal law (can prohibit)
How can SC influence public policy?
Judicial review-when overruling state or congressional law it is overruling elected branch wishes in an irreversible way
Public policy: Brown v Board of Education 1954
Key moment in civil rights
Catalyst for future civil rights ruling
Question of most effective way to advance rights -work within system or pressure from interest groups?
Turning point for direction of society. More racially aware
Only applied to education but opened door for other changes especially as it was unaminous
Roe v Wade 1973
Made abortion rights a law of the land
Safe access
Step forward for women’s freedoms and reproductive rights at a time when they were a massive issue in society
Balanced right to abortion with state interests-tied state regulation to third trimester
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Significant as it upheld abortion rights and confirmed Roe v Wade
Women had reproductive rights
