Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
The Judicial Branch of Government - Coggle Diagram
The Judicial Branch of Government
The Supreme Court’s place in the Judicial Branch of Government
The system of courts that interpret and apply the nation’s laws.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the federal judiciary, acting as the final court of appeal.
Appeal is the process by which either party can object the verdict
The Supreme Court does not concern itself with the facts of the case, focusing on constitutional importance
As the Consitution is sovereign, the SC is granted a massive power in determine what it says about a particular point of law.
It can consider laws passed by Congress or state legislatures, and can also declare actions of the executive as unconstitutional.
Judicial Review
Significance of Judicial Review
A very powerful check on the executive and legislature, with the only way to overrule the Court’s decision to formally amend the constitution.
Boumediene v Bush
2008
The Court ruled than foreign national detained as terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay had a right to challenge detentions in federal court.
It is not expressly explained in the Constitution, but established by a Supreme Court judgement
Marbury v Madison
1803
The first time the Court struck down an Act of Congress, establishing the Court could overrule legislation if it conflicted with the Constitution
Federal cases are first tried in a district court, where this decision can be appealed to the US Courts of Appeal
Judgement made by the US Court of Appeal can be appealed to the SC, which reviews between 100-150 a year.
Process of Selection and Appointment of Supreme Court Justices
One Chief Justice, and 8 associate justices, with decision having a profound impact on US politics, in areas such as civil rights, capital punishment, abortion and marriage.
Presidential Selection of the Nominee
Justices have life tenures so vacancies only arise if one dies, retires or is impeached.
The presiden’s team draws up a list of possible nominees, aiming to appoint justices who will share their view of how the Constitution should be interpreted.
Trump promised to choose from candidates suggested by the conservative legal group, the Federalist Society
The Federalist Society is a pressure group believing the legal profession is dominated by liberals.
Nominees must be confirmed by the Senate
Possible candidates are shortlisted and background-checked by lawyers and FBI.
Ronald Reagan nominated Douglas Ginsburg in 1987, withdrawing a few weeks later uncovering he had used marijuana as a law professor.
Senate Confirmation
Presidential nominee is considered by the
Senate Judiciary Committee
Most candidates come from the US Court of Appeals but can also come from state courts.
In 2021, 8/9 had sat on the Court of Appeals
The remaining justice, Elena Kegan, had never been a judge ,but a solicitor general at the DoJ, representing the executive in SC cases.
Witnesses help the committee assess the nominee’s suitability, then vote on the nominee.
The vote is only a recommendation to the Senate but indicates the ease of confirmation.
Clarence Thomas (1991-) had a 7-7 committee cote followed by a close 52-48 vote in the Senate following sexual harassment allegations
Simply majority required.
`Presidential nominations now only need a majority vote to allow closure on a filibuster, instead of 60 votes.
The change was a result of increased partisanship, as justices used to command more bipartisan support.
If party has a majority in the Senate, justices can be confirmed, allowing for more controversial candidates, such as Amy Coney Barrett in 2020, who did not receive a single vote from the minority.
Presidential elections were weeks awa, Republicans eager to take advantage of Senate majority
Barret could potentially rule in his favour if he chose to appeal the election result to the SC.
Defeat at the Senate stage is quite rare, last in 1987.
Independence Once Nominated
Life tenure means a president’s ability to influence them ends once they are appointed.
Justices often vote against the president that appointed them
Neil Gorsuch judged the president did not have an absolute right to withhold his tax returns and financial records from an investigation
Current Composition of the Supreme Court
The Chief Justice is currently John Roberts, appointed by George W. Bush in 2005, who has the same powers as associate justices but chairs the court.
John Roberts president over the impeachment trial of Trump in 2020.
The balance of justices have far more bearing on judgements than the individual Chief Justice , current 6-3 Conservative majority.
Odd number of justices prevents tied decisions, but if a seat is empty there may only be 8, or if they recuse themselves through involvment to a case
If tied, the lower court’s decision stands.
For years, Anthony Kennedy was known as the ‘swing vote’ appointed by Ronald Reagan. Swing vote now most regularly John Roberts
Conservative on gun control and campaign finance, but liberal on abortion, LGBTQ+ rights and affirmative action
Wrote the majority opinion for Obergefell v Hodges, legalising same sex marriage
The Supreme Court makes many judges not split on partisanship, regularly reaching unanimity, with rulings focusing on technical legal interpretation on issues not inherently poltiical.
IN some cases, poltiical leaning is less important than legal expertise.
Even in finely balanced rulings, the split is not ideologically partisan.
In the 2018-19 term, every Conservative justice voted with liberals at some point
Diversity
Only five women have ever sat on the court.
Only 2 African-Americans have ever sat on the court.
Sonia Sotomayor the first and only Hispanic.
The Constitutional Role of the Supreme Court
Interpret the Constitution and protect citizens’ rights.
Supreme Court as a Guardian of the Constitution
Although it is codified, it is not always clear. Supreme Court justices often disagree with how the Consitution should be interpreted.
Strict Constructionism
Judicial approach in which the text of the Constituionis followed as closely as possible when making judgements.
The Constitution is a precise legal document only updated by the formal amendment process.
Associated with orginialists who believe the language and words should be interpreted the way teh framers intended them to be read.
Antonio Scalia (1986-2016)
Republican presidents aim to appoint this way
Clarence Thomas appointed by George W. Bush
In practice, most judgements made by oringialists are conservative
Unlike Neil Gorsuch writing the majority opinion I on the landmark ruling which outlawed discrimination becuase of sexual orientation or gender.
Loose Constructionism
Judicial approach in which the Constitution is interpreted according to modern context.
Dominates the liberal wing of the Court, which allows the interpretation of the document to evolve over time
‘A living constitution’
Liberals criticise strict constructionism for preventing necessary change.
Conservatives argue that the practice of updating the meaning of the Constitution is a pwoer grab by unelected justices.
Not all justices identify as loose or strict constructionists
Sonia Sotomayor dismissed the focus on a living constitution, saying the decision-making process is far more complex.
Supreme Court as a Protector of Citizens Rights
Ultimate court of appeal for those who feel their rights have been infringed.
Citizens United v Federal Election Commission
2010
First Amendment: Freedom of Speech
Poltiical donations seen as an expression of free speech, ruling that corporations, unions and associations can make the same donations as an individual.
District of Columbia v Heller
2008
Second Amendment: Right to bear arms
Liberals interpret this as a collective right within a militia, conservatives view this as provides the right to the individual, infringed by gun control. Court struck down law banning handgun ownership.
Baze v Rees
2008
Eighth Amendment: The death penalty
Court focus on what constitutes ‘cruel and unusual punishment’, ruling lethal injection as not, so could be used for executions. The death penalty is legal in 31 states.
Political Significance of the Supreme Court
Political Appointees
Nominated by the President, with the current conservative composition threatening liberal Americans.
Controversial Rulings
Rules on controversial policy such as abortion, affirmative action, gun control, marriage and immigration.
Landmark rulings have led to significant changes to the law such as Roe v Wade, and Obergefell v Hodges.
These judgements have the same effect as a new law legalising abortion or same-sex marriage.
Obergefell v Hodges
2015
Obergefell married his husband in Maryland where same-sex marriage was legal, but Ohio did not recognise their marriage, focusing on the Fourteenth Amendment
Ruled 5-4, with the majority arguing the right to marry was fundamental.
Argument of the right to religious freedom was infringed.
Intervened in the electoral process
Bush v Gore
2000
Close election depending on Electoral College , with the Florida SC ordering a manual recount in certain counties, Bush appealed to SC.
A recount within the timeframe was unconstitutional, deciding he general election, voted in favour by all Conservative justices of Bush.
Quasi Legisaltive Body
Moved beyond the constitutional role of interpreting law to usurping Congress’ role in making the law.
Strict constructionists argue the Constitution does not mention abortion or same-sex marriage nor did the framers have any intention on authorising this
Condemn justices from ‘legislating from the bench’
Judicial Restraint
The SC avoids unnecessary conflict with the President or Congress, rarely overturning their actions or laws.
Upholds
stare decisis
where rulings should follow past precedent where possible
Justices take a deferential attitude to the executive and legisaltive as they are elected .
Judicial Activism
Making judgements to improve society, likely to strike down laws and rule against the executive opposed to deferring to the other two branches.
Brown v Topeka Board of Education
Supported by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the reconsideration of Plessy v Ferguson.
13 African American parents from Topeka, Kansas after their children denied access to the local all-white school, forcing them to travel miles to attend an all-black school.
Plessy v Ferguson underpinned segregation in the American South , as Southern state legislatures passed the Jim Crow laws enforcing ‘separate but equal’, which were not equal.
Entrenched racial inferiority.
SC ruled unanimously that the doctrine violated the Fourteenth Amendment giving citizens the right to ‘equal protection’ under a state’s laws.
Ruling was seen as an attack on states’ rights.
Chief Justice Earl Warren was leading an ‘activist court’ in this case. Determined to achieve consensus, chaired private discussions with justices to give unanimous ruling,
Less objection to breaking precedent as the Brown verdict did by reversing
Plessy v Ferguson
Federalism
Frequently, the SC makes decisions which overrule state law.
Roe v Wade could not be overruled by sttae legislatures, where abortion was illegal in 30, and restricted by many more
Also rules in favour of states as seen in
Murphy v National Collegiate Athletic Association
2018 striking down a Congress law in 1992, prohibiting states from authorising sports gambling.
Conservatives oppose new restrictions on states , whereas some liberals arguing it makes ‘states rights’ usable for justification of discrimination.
Significance of the Judiciary in Shaping One Area of Public Policy: Abortion
Roe v Wade
1973
Abortion was illegal in Texas but McCorvey (Roe) was pregnant at the time, lawyers challenged the right of Texan law to deny her an abortion.
SC ruled 7-2 that women had an unrestricted right to an abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy.
Considered the ‘due process’ Clause in the Foruteenth Amendemnt, implying a ‘right to rpivacy’
States could regulate abortion in the second trimester, only in the interests ff the mother’s health.
In the third, when the foetus could survive out of the womb, abortion could be banned unless a risk to maternal life.
Landmark case for the women’s movement to personal choice.
Abortion became hugely divisive
Passing of law by Congress would have proved broader support and a democratic mandate.
Following Roe v Wade, the Supreme Court made several improtant rulings on abortion.
Planned Parenthood v Casey
1992
Robert Casey (state governor of Pennsylvania) introduced several regulations on abortions challenged by Planned Parenthood.
Most regulations were allowed to stand despite not overturning Roe with a conservative majority.
The first trimester was now subject to restrictions
Gonzales v Carhart
2007
Challenge by doctors to the Partial- Birth Abortion Ban Act 2003.
Banned a certain type of abortion used in late-term pregnancies
It did not include an exception for the health of the mother so ruled unconstitutional in the lower federal courts.
The SC’s 5-4 judgement upheld the ban
Whole Woman’s Health v Hellerstedt
2016
Challenged several TRAP laws enacted by the Texas State Legislature.
Court ruled 5-3 that restrictions placed an ‘undue burden’ on women failing to provide a medical benefit enough to justify.
Greatest success of pro-choice
Trump’s Conservative Court
2016, if Trump were to become president he would overturn Roe v Wade straight away, appointing pro-life justices (however they turnt out to be strict constructionist aligning with precedent).
State legislatures with Conservative majorities passed laws in 2019 to restrict abortions (heartbeat bills) blocked.
Near total ban on abortions in Alabama blocked by Courts
States appealed, with campaign to remove federal abortion rights received support from more than 200 members of Congress, signing an
amicus curiae brief
asking the SC to reconsider Roe.
Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organisation
2022
The court held there was no right to abortion held under the Constitution.
Returned the right to individual states to decide legality of abortion
Amy Coney Barrett never considered Roe ‘super precedent’ as it was too controversial to be established law.
Many switched to a strategy in eroding abortion rights through legislation and legal challenges, opposed to simply overturning Roe v Wade.
Led state legislatures to pass a series of restrictions.
Pro-choice labelled these as Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers laws, medically unnecessary and intended to limit the availability of abortions.
2017, six states had only one abortion provider.