The Supreme Court and Public Policy Flashcards
What is judicial activism? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Judicial activism is whereby judges actively involve themselves in contentious debates, usually ruling against the status quo.
How is Brown v. Board (1954) an example of judicial activism? How is Roe v. Wade (1973) an example of judicial activism? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Brown v. Board outlawed the segregation of education in the US, beginning to dismantle the idea of Jim Crow Laws.
Roe v. Wade declared that the right to an abortion was a constitutionally protected right available to a woman.
How was Obergefell v Hodges (2015) an example of judicial activism? How was Bush v. Gore (2000) an example of judicial activism? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Obergefell v. Hodges legalised same-sex marriage in the US.
Bush v. Gore awarded the Presidency to Bush following a disputed election outcome in Florida.
How was Citizens United v. FEC (2010) an example of judicial activism? How was DC v. Heller (2008) an example of judicial activism? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Citizens United v. FEC ruled that limits on political expenditures in favour of campaigns that were independent of those campaigns was a violation of the First Amendment.
DC v. Heller ruled that the right to bear arms extended beyond militia membership and included self-defence.
How do judges with the judicial activist mindset see the relationship and powers of the Court with the legislature and executive? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Activist judges largely see themselves as having an equal responsibility and power to the Executive and Legislature in shaping policy.
What issues arise from the philosophy of judicial activism? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Judicial activism brings the unelected and unaccountable Supreme Court into conflict with democratically elected and accountable politicians over their decision making, often making judgements that avert the status quo that would never be passed in Congress.
What does judicial restraint mean? What is a stare decisis? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Judicial restraint is whereby the Court is more inclined to accept the decisions of elected individuals and not intervene in debates by accepting the status quo.
A stare decisis is a legal principle that, wherever possible, judges should allow a decision to stand.
How is Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt (2016) an example of judicial restraint? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt saw Roe v. Wade upheld through the principle of restraint when a Texas state law obstructing women from abortions was struck down.
How is Bucklew v. Precythe (2019) an example of judicial restraint? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Bucklew v. Precythe saw the Court protect the execution of prisoners despite it potentially being painful, placing the onus on the prisoner to prove that any punishment is cruel and unusual. Upheld the principle of the death penalty.
How did the Supreme Court adopt judicial restraint with regards to Obamacare through 2012’s Sebelius ruling? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
2012’s Sebelius ruling upheld the federal government’s Affordable Care Act by accepting its funding plans as a form of tax. This upheld existing public policies and preserved the health agenda of Obama’s government.
How did the Supreme Court adopt a policy of judicial restraint with regards to Trump’s travel ban? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
The Supreme Court upheld Trump’s 2017 travel ban, accepting the decision of the federal government to prevent travel to the US from certain majority Muslim countries as this was arguably justified.
How did the Supreme Court show judicial activism with regards to Obama’s existing immigration policy? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
The Supreme Court overturned Obama’s DAPA Executive Order which would have postponed the deportation of undocumented immigrants. The Court argued that Obama had exceeded his powers in doing so.
How did the Supreme Court display judicial activism in establishing new policy through Carpenter v. United States? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Carpenter v. United States saw a landmark decision reached that any search of cell phone data in a prosecution requires a warrant and that the absence of this results in a breach of the 4th Amendment.
How does Planned Parenthood of Arkansas v. Jegley demonstrate Court inaction (and therefore restraint)? - Supreme Court and Public Policy
Planned Parenthood of Arkansas v Jegley saw the Supreme Court decline to hear a case which challenged strict regulation of abortion under the Arkansas state legislature. The refusal to hear this case meant that abortion continued to be heavily obstructed in Arkansas, hence deferring to the state legislature.
