The Supreme Court
The Highest Court in the Land and Their Influence
Over American Democracy
Why is the Supreme Court so
important to American democracy?

Only the Supreme Court has the final say
about what the Constitution means and
what laws will be allowed.

A Supreme court decision establishes the
broadest and the most lasting precedents
in the legal system.
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Judicial review is the power to overturn ay law that the Supreme Court
decides is in conflict with the Constitution – or unconstitutional!
“The Judiciary keeps the
Legislature subordinate to the
Constitution.”
- The Federalist, No. 78
Marbury V. Madison, 1803
In the case of Marbury V. Madison, neither
the plaintiff nor the defendant was satisfied
with the verdict – but Chief Justice John
Marshall did more to empower the court
than any previous justice. He ruled that the
Judiciary Act of 1789, which allowed
Marbury to bring his case to the Supreme
Court, was unconstitutional! In doing so,
the precedent was set for judicial review.
Chief Justice John
Marshall established
the principle of judicial
review in the case of
Marbury V. Madison.
Chief Justice John Marshall
Judicial Review in Action
Since 1803, over one
thousand state and local
laws have been declared
unconstitutional by the
Supreme Court. There
have also been over one
hundred federal laws
deemed unconstitutional.
Most recently, the
Defense of Marriage Act
was struck by the
Supreme Court and some
portions of the Voting
Rights Act of 1965 were
struck from the law.
Thurgood Marshall – The Nation’s
First African-American Justice
Sandra Day O’Connor – The Nation’s
First Female Supreme Court Justice
Supreme Court Justices are selected by the President and confirmed by the
United States Senate. The first African American approved for the position was
Thurgood Marshall in 1967; Sandra Day O’Connor became the first female
Supreme Court Justice in 1981.
Selection of Cases
The Supreme Court has a certain number of cases
each year which it must hear because the court has
original jurisdiction. Then, there are over 8,000
cases per year which are appealed to the Supreme
Court. Since the Court cannot hear all of theses
cases, they select only the cases which have
significant points of law to be considered to hear
arguments. Fewer than 100 cases are hear each
year. Review the chart on page 280 to see the small
percentage of cases which are actually ruled upon –
and have opinions written – by the Supreme Court.
Arguments Before the Supreme
Court
The arguments are
presented to the court in
writing as briefs – from
both sides – before the
actual trial begins.
 Each attorney then has
thirty minutes to argue
their case before the
Court, but beware!
 Members of the Supreme
Court will bombard each
lawyer with questions and
comments during these
arguments to clarify point
or poke holes in their
argument.

Making Decisions…
The Supreme Court
Justices meet together
to make decisions in
each case. The Chief
Justice, currently John
Roberts, leads these
discussions, but every
justice has the
opportunity to make
comments. Then,
opinions are written
by the court. Every
justice can write an
opinion – and they can
change their vote in
the process of writing,
as well.
Types of Opinions…
In the context of the Supreme Court of the United
States, an opinion is a statement explaining the
reasons for the Court’s decision. Opinions can be
brief and dismissive at times, but the vast majority
are well researched, comprehensively cited, and
long! In an opinion, the Court explains why they
have made their decision. For example, when the
new health care law was ruled Constitutional
(Obamacare) it was because the Court declared
that the Congress had the power to tax and use
the money for the general welfare of the people, if
they so chose.
Concurring Opinions
Not everyone on the court is required to
report their findings. Often, however, if a
member of the Court agrees with the
opinion of the majority but has slightly
different logic, they will write a concurring
opinion in order to explain their
perspective.
 With Nine (9) Justices on the Supreme
Court, it is rare that they all agree on
controversial points of law.

Dissenting Opinions

A justice who DOES
NOT agree with the
majority – and
remember, many of the
cases are decided on a
5-4 vote – can write a
dissenting opinion in
order to explain why
they disagree with the
remainder of the
Supreme Court.
Precedent
Judges look to previous cases in order to
make determinations regarding the decisions
they must make.
 They assume that the law is the will of the
people, and review the law over time.
 Precedent is important because respecting
past decisions by judges and Justices of the
Supreme Court allows the nation to develop a
consistent body of law.
 What were the intentions of lawmakers at
the time they made laws?

The President Selects New
Supreme Court Justices
The United States V. Nixon
When it came to the
attention of Congress
that there were
recordings of the goings
on in the Oval Office
during President Nixon’s
administration, the
Congress demanded the
tapes in order to find
evidence as to whether
or not Nixon had
broken the law. Nixon
claimed executive
privilege. The Supreme
Court, however, did not
agree. He was forced to
hand over the tapes to
Congress, and eventually
to resign as President of
the United States.
Judicial Activism
Judicial Activism is
the tendency of
judges on the
Supreme Court t
take an active role in
policymaking by
overturning laws
relatively often. Many
worried that the
health care law
passed by President
Obama many be
overturned by the
Supreme Court;
however, most of the
law remained intact
after it was taken to
the Supreme Court
last year.
Judicial Restraint
Judicial restraint is
more or less the
opposite of judicial
review. It is an
effort by judges to
avoid overturning
laws and to leave
policymaking to
the branches of
government which
were designed for
the purpose: the
Congress and the
President.
Roe V.Wade (1973)
This Supreme
Court decision
found that no state
could make a law
which forbid
women to have
abortions. Recently
many states have
passed extremely
restrictive abortion
laws which may be
considered by the
Supreme Court on
appeal. North
Carolina was the
most recent state
to do so.
Presidents Shape the Court
Congress can refuse to confirm a
President’s nominee for the Supreme Court.
When Clarence Thomas
was nominated for the
Supreme Court, he was
accused of sexual
harassment and other
embarrassing by professor
Anita Hill. He was
confirmed by the Senate –
but barely. Since joining
the court, he almost always
decides cases in agreement
with Judge Scalia, and he
almost never asks
questions during hearings
or writes lengthy opinions.
RECOURSE FOR
CONGRESS
When the Supreme Court rules a law passed by
the Congress unconstitutional, Congress has one
recourse – the amendment process.
THE VOTING RIGHTS
ACT OF 1965
The Supreme Court recently gutted portions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, arguing that they were
unnecessary today. Many Americans would disagree, including the artist of this political cartoon, who
suggests that old “Jim Crow” has been let out of his cage again.