US supreme court

Question 1

presidential selection of a nominee

Answer 1

aim to appoint those who share their view of how constitution should be interpreted e.g. Trump promised to choose nominees from cons legal group Federalist Society suggestions

background FBI check e.g. Anthony Kennedy 1988 iterviewed for over 10 hours- sexual history

Question 2

senate judiciary committee

Answer 2

interviewed in televised hearing, then SJC votes
only rec but fortells result e.g. RBG unnanimous committee vote, then 96-3 in senate
if committee partisan, senate probably is e.g. Clarence Thomas 7-7 SJC, 52-48 senate

Question 3

senate confirmation

Answer 3

simple majority
used to be 60 votes for cloture but 2013 nuclear option which allowed cloture w simple maj
means now justices can be confirmed if one party have maj, allowing more controversial candidates
e.g. 2020 Amy C-B first SCJ not to get single minority vote in 150 yrs

Question 4

merrick garland

Answer 4

2016
Rs held senate and said they wouldn’t consider in hearings him due to upcoming Nov election
Ds said it was unprecedented and president should still be able to nominate

Question 5

Amy Coney Barrett

Answer 5

2020
R eager to take advantage of majority
Trump wanted her confirmed to rule in his favour if he appealed electoin result

Question 6

Clarence Thomas

Answer 6

1991
accusations of sexual harassment from former colleague Anita Hill
confirmed by senate partisan vote- only 11 D supported

Question 7

Brett Kavanaugh

Answer 7

2018
denied allegations of sexual misconduct
important significane- nominated by Trump to replace swing Kennedy
only 1 D for and 1 R against

Question 8

arguments for appointment process effective

Answer 8

1. detailed scrutiny (FBI, SJC)- opps for unsuitable candidates withdrawn
2. independent once appointed and may follow unexpected approach
3. both pres and senate involved: 2 elected branches oversee. important for democracy

Question 9

judges independent once appointed

Answer 9

life terms and not influenced by president
e.g. R George Bush appointed Souter 1990- became unexpectedly liberal member of SC

Question 10

arguments against appointment process effective

Answer 10

1. pres choose nominees who support their philosophy
2. political decision making violates president’s right to appoint e.g. Garland
3. increased partisanship = not assessing nominees actual qualities e.g. Kavanaugh, Amy CB

Question 11

balance of the Supreme Court

Answer 11

Kennedy former swing vote - cons gun control but maj opinion for Obergefell v Hodges. replaced by Kavanaugh (cons) e.g. Rucho v Common Clause 2019- rule partisan gerrymandering constitutional.

still regular unanimity e.g. 2018-19 under 50% of 5-4 decisions were partisan- legal side more important

Question 12

diversity of Supreme Court

Answer 12

only 6 women ever sat on court, ut 4 currently- Sotomayor, Kagan, Coney Barrett, Brown Jackson
3 African Americans
1 hispanic

Question 13

strict constructionism

Answer 13

interpreted literally- only updated formally
e.g Scalia- “it means today what ut meant when it was adopted”
R presidents e.g. Trump- Gorusch, Kavanaugh
most originalists are R

Question 14

loose constructionism

Answer 14

interpreted loosly and applied to modern text
needs to change to society’s needs
D presidents e.g. Stephen Breyer “interpreted in light of our whole experience”

Question 15

Supreme Court as protector of rights

Answer 15

2014 Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores- struck down part of ACA that made family run businesses contribute to health insurance that may be used for contraceptives. (protect 1st amendemnt freedom of religion)

Question 16

controversial rulings

Answer 16

politically significant changes
e.g. Bush v Gore 2000- recount of Florida’s votes within the timeframe was unconstitutional

Question 17

quasi-legislative body

Answer 17

through its decisions, SCJ creates new rights for Americans and moves beyond interpretive role?
‘legislating from the bench’
effectively making new law

Question 18

judicial restraint

Answer 18

conservative judges claim judicial restraint.
tend to rule in line with precedent and therefore rarely unconstitutional

Question 19

federalism

Answer 19

has made decisions overruling state laws e.g. Obergefell v Hodges

Question 19

judicial activism

Answer 19

liberal judges- likely to strike down to improve society
e.g. Brown V Topeka

Question 20

Brown v Topeka

Answer 20

1954
“separate but equal” clause legitimised idea of racial inferiority
SC ruled this violted 14th amendment “equal protection”- key victory for growing civil rights movement

Question 21

Obergefell v Hodges

Answer 21

2015
Obergefell married husband in Maryland but Ohio didnt recognise
5-4 ruling that right to marry was fundamental by 14 amendment.
fundamental change by unelected body

Question 22

Roe v Wade

Answer 22

1973
Roe challenged right of Texan law to deny abortion, 7-2 maj
‘right to privacy’- due process clause