US SUPREME COURT AND CIVIL RIGHTS
4.1 The nature and role of the Supreme Court
The central role of the Supreme Court is to uphold the Constitution, as outlined in Article III. As a
constitutional court (rather than a criminal one) it is not trying to ascertain innocence or guilt.
Instead, it determines the acceptability (or otherwise) of actions within the rules of the Constitution.
The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior
Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
Established by • Establishes a Supreme Court (Art. III Sec. 1)
Constitution • Extent of judicial power ‘to all Cases in Law and Equity arising under the
constitution’ (Art.III Sec. 2). The Supreme Court cannot initiate cases but must
wait for a constitutional dispute to arise.
• Life tenure for judges during ‘good behaviour’ (Art. III Sec. 1)
• Original jurisdiction – a case is tried at the Supreme Court and does not have
to be heard first in a lower court, in cases such as those involving constitutional
disputes between states and between federal government and the states (Art. III
Sec. 2).
• Appellate jurisdiction – most cases must go to another court before being
presented to the Supreme Court on appeal. The losing side in a lower court can
appeal to the next court level until finally reaching the Supreme Court.
• The appointment process (Art. 2 Sec. 2) – all justices are nominated by the
president and ratified by the Senate.
Implied by The power of judicial review is the central power of the Court, allowing it to
Constitution overturn any other institution because the Court declares its actions to be
unconstitutional. The Court gave itself this power in Marbury v Madison 1803
when it first overturned an Act of Congress. This power was further defined in
Fletcher v Peck 1810 in which the Court overturned state law for the first time.
Some argue that this power is apparent in the Constitution, as the Supreme
Court is charged with upholding matters arising under the Constitution. Others
argue that the power of judicial review is not a legitimate power, as it is not
awarded to the Supreme Court by the Constitution.
Established by Congress has the power to:
Acts of • establish ‘inferior courts’ – Congress determined a series of federal courts with
Congress constitutional power. There are 13 circuit courts (or appeals courts) below the
under Supreme Court, the final court of appeal
constitutional • determine the number of justices on the Court, which has long been set at
authority nine, originating from post-civil war legislation.
Judicial independence:
The Constitution ensures that the highest court in the United States is independent from other
political institutions. This is particularly important for a constitutional court because it has the role of
determining the constitutional acceptability of the laws and actions of president and Congress. A
court that is accountable to these institutions may be unable to give a ruling that regulates the
president or Congress.
Separation of The separation of personnel means that no one in the executive or
powers legislature works closely with judges, so there is little chance of close
connections or pressure. (By contrast, in the UK, the highest court, the Law
Lords was until recently placed inside a legislative body, the House of
, Lords.)
Appointment The president cannot determine the appointment of justices alone, but
process instead nominates, then the Senate accepts or rejects, having the power to
ratify via a simple majority. This could prevent the president appointing
someone who will not act independently, because they have close
connections to the president.
Life tenure Justices are appointed for life, preventing a threat of removal. President or
Congress cannot remove a justice (though if a justice has acted illegally,
Congress can remove them through a supermajority). This gives justices the
freedom to act regardless of the wishes of the president of the day.
Salary The judicial compensation clause of Article III protects the pay of judges,
stating that their pay ‘shall not be diminished during their continuance in
office’. Currently a Sc justices pay is $250,000. This prevents bribery and
influence from political bodies.
Process of judicial review:
The Supreme Court cannot initiate a case. Cases are presented to court by an individual or institution
who feels that the Constitution has been broken. The Supreme Court receives between 7000 and
8000 cases a year. The court has no duty to hear a case and currently opts to hear more than 100
cases per year. In the 2015–16 term the court dealt with 80 cases. The court has some discretion in
determining its own constitutional priorities.
The Supreme Court operates in a similar way to a criminal court. There is a plaintiff and a defendant.
Lawyers make arguments on either side, being given just 30 minutes to present their oral
arguments. All nine justices usually hear a case; the justices can ask questions or make points during
these hearings.
Once a case is heard, the Supreme Court discusses the case in private in order to reach a majority
opinion of five or more. A justice in the majority is tasked with writing the opinion, with input from
other justices. The opinion of the court is a written document detailing how the Constitution has or
has not been broken, at some length – for example, the Affordable Care Act ruling, NFIB v Sebelius,
runs to 193 pages. A majority opinion is an agreement by five or more members. It helps set
precedent for future cases, particularly for political institutions, organisations and individuals.
The Supreme Court could choose to have a narrow and limited impact, or a broad-ranging one, when
writing their opinion. In split decisions, a minority opinion is also written. In hearing a case, the
Supreme Court has the power to declare that the actions or laws of other institutions are
unconstitutional. This allows the court to overturn those actions or laws using the power of judicial
review.
Marbury v Madison 1803: Created judicial precedent to rule federal law as unconstitutional
Fletcher v Peck 1810: Supreme Court ruled against state law, extending power of judicial
review to state law as well as federal law.
This is a controversial power because SC justices are unelected going against elected
governments at state and federal levels. As a result, it could be considered that judges are
going against the will of the people. Some also argue that it is not explicitly stated in the
Constitution, so the judiciary is acted beyond its enumerated powers.
