US Supreme Court and Civil Rights - Topic 4.3 Flashcards
The Supreme Court and public policy
How can the Supreme Court influence public policy?
Since the Supreme Court is interpreting the sovereign Constitution, its rulings are effectively sovereign, giving considerable power over the policy the government creates. It can do so by either upholding it, striking it down or just choosing not to hear a case.
Recent Supreme Court rulings:
What was the impact of Citizens United v FEC (2010)
Elections and election spending
Ruling: Some provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (McCain-Feingold Act/BCRA) violate the 1st Amendment.
The ruling created a new policy allowing for the development of Super-PACs, which could raise unlimited amounts for campaigning, by striking down part of a law from Congress.
Recent Supreme Court rulings:
What was the impact of Americans for Prosperity v Bonta (2021)
Elections and election spending
Ruling: Requiring charities to disclose the identity of donors violated the 1st Amendment.
The ruling raised concerns that ‘dark money’ would become more prevalent as it can easily influence elections and is difficult to trace.
Recent Supreme Court rulings:
What was the impact of NFIB v Sebelius (2011)
Healthcare
Ruling: The individual mandate functions as a tax and therefore is within Congress’ power to levy.
The ruling upheld Obamacare, allowing for it to continue, merely just upheld the law that had already passed.
Recent Supreme Court rulings:
What was the impact of California v Texas (2020)
Healthcare
Ruling: The individual mandate being reduced to $0 by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 did not invalidate Obamacare.
The Court upheld Obamacare again, but it didn’t rule on the constitutionality of the individual mandate (the requirement for individuals to have health insurance or face a fine).
Recent Supreme Court rulings:
What was the impact of Michigan v Environment Protection Agency (EPA) (2015)
Environment
Ruling: The EPA must consider the cost implications of enforcing the Clean Air Act, rather than simply the need to regulate.
This ruling by the Supreme Court limited the interpretation allowed by the executive branch when enforcing legislation. Rather than simply regulating for clean air, the EPA now had to consider whether the costs would be justified, undermining Obama’s environment policy.
