Summary US Supreme Court and Civil Rights (revision notes)
13 views 0 purchase
Course
Comparative Politics (9PLO3A)
Institution
PEARSON (PEARSON)
Book
Pearson Edexcel A Level US Government and Politics
Supreme Court and civil rights notes produced for the Edexcel A level politics (Comparative Politics) exam. Contains key and up-to-date examples, details and theory as well as comparative approaches to the Supreme Court. Work produced by a student with four A* predictions and an Oxbridge offer.
Membership of the Supreme court
- 9 justices who are nominated by the president
- Appointments confirmed by a simple majority in the senate
- Appointed for life
- Anthony Kennedy served for more than 30 years
- Chief Justice: John Roberts (Bush)
- Newest member: Amy Coney Barrett (Trump)
- No Supreme court justice has ever been impeached, although Associate
Justice Abe Fortas resigned rather than face impeachment
N.B. in the above table Stephen Breyer has been replaced with Ketanji Brown-
Jackson who was appointed by president Biden (D)
Independence of the Supreme Court
- Article III of the Constitution gives Congress the power to change the
composition of the Supreme Court
- Article III states that justices are guaranteed in their role for life and their
salary is protected – they can disappoint their patrons (e.g. former VP Mike
Pence called Justice Roberts a ‘great disappointment’ to American
conservatives and Roberts voted to uphold Obamacare in NFIB v Sebelius in
2012)
- The American Bar Association rates the suitability of the nominees
- Roosevelt considered increasing the size of Congress to pass the New Deal,
but this never happened
- Justices can only be removed through the impeachment process – House
must impeach by a simple majority and the Senate must try the justice
- Supreme Court lacks enforcement powers, e.g. Brown v Board of Education
of Topeka (1954)
The process of Judicial Review
- Marbury v Madison (1803) – first time the Supreme Court declared an Act of
Congress unconstitutional
, - Fletcher v Peck (1810) – first time the Supreme Court declared a state law
unconstitutional
Political importance of the Supreme Court
- demonstrated by Bush v Gore (2000)
- determined that Trump’s executive order was constitutional in Trump v
Hawaii (2018) (Breyer and Sotomayor both read their dissents from the
bench)
- Court upheld the lower court injunction blocking Obama’s DAPA program in
United States v Texas (2016)
Appointment process and the confirmation process
Increasingly political?
- Supreme Court Justices used to be approved by overwhelmingly bipartisan
votes (e.g. Anthony Kennedy 97-0 in 1988)
- Votes now much more likely to be split across party lines, e.g. Brett
Kavanaugh, 50-48 in 2018, Amy Coney Barrett
- The Federalist Society (conservative) and the American Constitution Society
(progressive) are pressure groups who seek to influence judicial
appointments
Strengths and weaknesses
- Trump was able to nominate three justices to the Supreme Court in just one
4-year term (Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett) while Jimmy Carter
appointed none
- The longest-serving current justice on the court is Clarence Thomas, who
was nominated back in 1991 by George HW Bush
- Senate Judiciary Committee votes on whether there is a need to recommend
further action, but this is only a recommendatory vote
- The Senate has formally rejected 12 nominations since 1789
o The most recent formal rejection was that of Reagan’s nominee
Robert Bork in 1987 by 42 votes to 58 (seen as too conservative and
too closely associated with Richard Nixon)
o Clarence Thomas’s confirmation hearings were dominated by
accusations of sexual harassment and he was felt to be inexperienced
o In 2005, George W Bush’s nominee Harriet Miers withdrew once it
became clear she would not secure the needed votes
o Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 failed
o There were explosive hearings for Trump’s nominee Brett Kavanaugh
in 2018
o Susan Collins voted against the confirmation of Coney Barrett
- Presidents almost always politicise their nominations by attempting to
choose justices who share their political views and judicial philosophy (e.g.
Obama with Kagan)
- The process is a thorough one – the full Senate vote on Brett Kavanaugh was
delayed until an FBI investigation was conducted on the sexual assault
allegations against him
- The Senate Judiciary Committee undertakes detailed scrutiny
- Justices often disappoint their patrons
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller at7777. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $8.14. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
