Supreme Court Flashcards
(26 cards)
Factors which reinforce the independence of the SC
- Balance rule
- Role for life and security of tenure
- Separation of powers > constitutional independence. Judicial review > check the power of president and Congress.
- The American Bar Association is an interest group which is made up of professional lawyers, rather than just political actors. The ABA rates the sustainability of the nominee and their understanding of the law and the Constitution.
Strengths of the independence of the Court
- Ensures judicial independence - salary rate is fixed and justices with life tenure cannot be sacked unless they are found guilty in the impeachment.
- Ensures judicial ability - In 2005, Harriet Miers as the George W Bush nominee was rejected due to lack of prior experience as a judge and being a close friend and advisor to Bush.
- Ensures personal suitability - In Kavanaugh’s hearing, he had an over 32 hours hearing from the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate if he really had sexually assaulted several women due to improper FBI investigations into allegations.
Weaknesses of the independence of the Court
- Confirmation process can be used for political purposes because it was a rubber stamp in the past.
- Justice Kavanaugh in 2018 nominated by Trump had an over 32 hours hearing with loads of questions including from the Vice President Kamala Harris whilst Kavanaugh accused Harris that she made him cry. - Confirmation process is open to abuse because the Senate Judiciary Committee holds the power to decide if confirmation process will be held.
- Mitch McConnell as the minority leader of the Senate and the member of the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to hold a hearing to confirm Merrick Garland who was Obama’s nominee. - Presidential nominees can be the political legacy for presidents when they leave the executive office.
- e.g. Trump successfully appointed 3 justices including Neil Gorsch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett to extend his legacy and exert influence over the Supreme Court decisions. Especially Justice Amy Coney Barrett was accepted in a rush, two weeks before the presidential election 2020. - Appointment process is ineffective to investigate the background of the nominees and some of them do not even have judicial ability.
- Kavanaugh are accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault from ex colleague and several women, yet they still become justices.
What’s an example of the Court being political/not independent/neutral?
Roberts gave majority opinion in US v Trump 2024 - said he wanted a “robust vigrous executive”
Factors influencing the president’s choice of nominee.
- Ideological leaning
- Judicial ability
- Political motivations
- Social characteristics
- Age
Organism/strict constructionist
Justices who have strict interpretation on; original meaning (from the literal meaning of the constitution), favour state autonomy over federal power. e.g. Roe v. Wade (1973) was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson (2022) and this retrieves the power to control abortion rights to the states.
Liberal/loose constructionist
Justices who have loose interpretation as; constitution is a living, dynamic and thriving document (pragmatic approach on constitution and move/evolve with the society), favour federal power over state control. e.g. Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) to allow same-sex marriage in a federal level.
The current composition and ideological balance of the Court.
- Chief Justice John Roberts (Conservative)
- Clarence Thomas (Conservative)
- Samuel Alito (Conservative)
- Neil Gorsuch (Conservative)
- Brett Kavanaugh (Conservative)
- Amy Coney Barrett (Conservative)
- Elena Kagan (Liberal)
- Sonia Sotomayor (Liberal)
- Ketanji Brown Jackson (Liberal)
In what court case did the SC give its power of judicial review
Marbury v. Madison (1803) when it first overturned an Act of Congress
What body is the SC called?
Quasi-legislative body.
- SC uses the ability for agencies to enact rules and regulations despite that agency not possessing the constitutional ability to do so)
How does the SC become a quasi legislative body?
When its interpretations of vague or old laws effectively create new legal standards that apply nationwide — especially when Congress is too slow or divided to act.
- Obergefell v Hodges
- Brown v Board of Education
- NFIB v Sebelius
- Bostock v Clayton County
- Citizens United v FEC
SC cannot initiate cases due to..
- Judicial restraint (no political bias and maintaining judicial neutrality and independence)
- Johnson v. Texas: burning flags is not supported but not illegal due to freedom of expression (1st Amendment)
How does the SC act as a pioneer and takes over the legislative role by exposing the ineffective Congress’s weakness
Only 3% of the bills are passed). Judicial activism.
- Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the Supreme Court declared school segregation unconstitutional. Congress had not acted to address racial segregation, so the Court took the lead, protecting civil rights by enforcing the Constitution.
Example of Congress protecting rights and make social progress by codifying laws
- Obergefell v. Hodges (same-sex marriage) is fully protected after entrenched through legislation of Respects for Marriage Act 2022
- Roe v. Wade was overturned by Dobbs v. Jackson 2022 (not entrenched rights)
What are the 4 arguments that the SC justices position is not a political position
- Legal position therefore should be more impartial
- Role is to protect the rights of all Americans even as different parties take power
- Serve for life retire / impeach > promotes long term stability compared to the President who has a political role who can only serve for up to 2 terms in office.
- Interpret and apply the law impartially regardless of their personal or political views
What are the 6 arguments that the SC justices position is a political position
- A president nominates someone who is likely to to reflect their ideology
- Trump’s selection of Gorsuch in 2017 who had conservative principles - Many justices remain close to the President, which could reflect their turnout of bills and legal cases.
- Fortas had a direct phone line to the president of the United States (L.B Johnson) and even wrote some of his speeches. - Justices also accepted outside income and affiliated with third-party interest groups.
- As associate justice, Fortas knowingly shared important information with the president concerning court deliberations and weighed in on matters of policy and constitutional law.
- Bush v. Gore (2000) had an influential impact on determining who would win and become the POTUS (George W Bush)
- Justice Kavanaugh 2018 faces intense scrutiny/highly publicised confirmation process due to allegations of sexual misconduct
US v Trump - 2024
’ The President is immune from prosecution from acts carried out as apart of the executive function ‘
- Roberts gave majority opinion - said he wanted a “robust vigrous executive”
What does Roberts mean when he said he wanted a “robust vigrous executive”?
The President — as head of the executive branch — needs strong, independent authority to do the job effectively.
- Goes back to the idea Federalist No. 70 (by Alexander Hamilton), which argues that a strong presidency is essential to good government.
- The president needs to act quickly, decisively, and independently — especially in crises like war, national security, or emergencies
Why does Roberts want a “robust vigrous executive”?
What is he worrried about?
- Weaponising the legal system against future presidents
- Turning presidential decision-making into a legal liability
- Making the executive “timid” or overly cautious out of fear of prosecution
What are critics worried about in the decision of US v Trump?
- This could give the president too much immunity — even for corrupt or criminal acts
- “Robust executive” might just be cover for letting powerful people avoid accountability
- It dangerously expands executive privilege and weakens checks and balances
What case gave the federal government (env protection agency) the freedom to create and implement rules without fear of protracted legal battles?
Chevron v Natural Resources Defense Council 1984
How long have the SC been trying to overturn the Chevron case?
4 decades
Why have the SC been trying to overturn the Chevron case for 4 decades?
- Chevron let them: Interpret laws (legislative power), Enforce rules (executive power), Punish violations (judicial powe)
- Agencies aren’t elected
- Made courts too deferential — like saying, “We’ll just trust whatever the agency says.”
- Agencies started regulating everything
