Supreme Court Overview
•General Characteristics of the Court
•History of the Supreme Court
•Supreme Court Procedure
•Legal Influences on Decisions
•Constitutional Interpretation
General Characteristics
of the Court
• Both a Legal and Political Institution
– Legal Aspects
• Has specific jurisdiction to hear disputes
• Can only hear legal issues from cases brought
specifically before it
• Lifetime appointment of justices generates certain
political insulation
– Political Aspects
• Each decision creates a broader policy implication
• Legal interpretation subject to ideological influence
General Characteristics
of the Court
• Policy Making on the Court
– Specific dispute brought by litigants (parties)
– Court renders a decision for one litigant
– Interpretation of law or general policy statement
generates implications for society
• Limitations to Policy Making
– Few decisions per year (around 80)
– Exercise of judicial restraint and deference to other
branches
• Judicial Activism
– When the Court inserts its own preferences over
policy for those of another institution
History of the Supreme Court
• Court Building
– First met in basement of building on Wall Street in
New York City (then moved to Philadelphia)
– Moved to Washington, DC, when capitol relocated
• Met in the basement of the Capitol Building
– Moved into Supreme Court building in 1935
• Personnel
– Judiciary Act 1789 created 6 justices
– Subsequent legislation moved number between 10
and 5
– Most recent change in 1869 – to 9 justices
History of the Supreme Court
• Voting
– Simple majority vote determines winner
– Justices may recuse themselves and not hear a
dispute (lowers number of votes)
– Quorum of 6 justices needed (if no quorum then the
lower court decision is affirmed)
– Tie vote results in affirmance of lower court
• Court Schedule
• Term begins first Monday in October and lasts until end of
June
• Term divided into 2 week sessions where justices hear oral
arguments and announce decisions
• Two week recess where research and opinion writing take
place
History of the Supreme Court
• Docket History of the Court
– 1790-1865: issues of federalism
– 1865-1937: economic issues
– 1937-today: civil liberties
Supreme Court Procedure
• Certiorari
– Approximately 8,000 petitions for a writ of certiorari
every year
• Takes four (4) justices to grant certiorari (known as the Rule
of Four)
– Approximately 80 cases granted certiorari
– Cases initially placed on the Discuss List for further
review (1 justice needed to place case)
– Some cases Dismissed as Improvidently Granted
(DIG)
• Occurs after initial grant of certiorari, case is not reviewed
Supreme Court Procedure
• Oral Arguments
– Each litigant receives 30 minutes to present case
– Often interrupted by the justices (which uses up their
time)
• Initial Conference
– Justices meet behind closed doors to discuss the
case
– Chief Justice speaks first, Associate justices speak in
order of seniority
– Vote taken on case
• If Chief is in the majority coalition he assigns the opinion
author
• Otherwise, most senior Associate Justice in the majority
assigns
Supreme Court Procedure
• Final Decision
– Final vote taken based on the language of the
majority opinion (each justice votes)
• Simple majority vote determines which Litigant
wins the case
• In the event of a tie, the lower court decision
stands
– Individuals have the option of joining the
majority opinion or casting a dissenting vote
• Individuals then have option of writing a concurring
opinion (if they sided with the majority) or a
dissenting opinion (if they sided with the minority)
Supreme Court Procedure
• Majority Opinion
– At least 5 justices needed to “sign on”
• This is absolute and irrespective of the total
number of justices voting (need at least six justices
in order to have quorum)
– Majority opinion considered precedent
– If less than 5 justices “sign on” to the opinion
it is considered a plurality opinion
• Plurality opinions are not considered precedent
• Determining whether a case is considered
precedent is vital!!!
Supreme Court Procedure
• Concurring Opinions
– Happen when justice agrees with the outcome stated
by the majority opinion but not with the reasoning
• Regular concurrences – do not detract from precedent
• Special concurrences – argue against legal rationale in the
majority opinion and can detract from the precedent
• Dissenting Opinions
– Occur when justice disagrees with the outcome stated
by the majority
– Opinion often highlights problems with the majority
opinion’s legal argument
Legal Influences on Decisions
• Characteristics of a statute
– Text – language of the bill
– Context – atmosphere under which bill was passed
– Effect – outcome generated after implementation
• Plain Meaning of Statute
– What do the actual words mean?
– Difficulties using Plain Meaning
• Problems with language and ambiguity
• Intent of Framers or Legislature
– What did writers of the law or constitution mean to
happen?
– Found in historical records
– Difficulties with Framers’ (Legislative) Intent
• Poor historical records – especially with Framers
• Which Framer do you use? What about compromises?
Legal Influences on Decisions
• Precedent
– Past cases as legal reference Stare Decisis
– Cases before Supreme Court are usually different
from precedent (otherwise would have denied
certiorari)
– Reluctance of Court to overturn precedent
– Difficulties with Precedent
• With growing body of precedent on both sides, judges
can simply ignore some past cases
• Factual distinction
• Narrow the interpretation of precedent
Constitutional Interpretation
• ‘Constitutional’ Distinction
– Constitutional Text
• The actual document mapping out political/social
arrangements
• Not necessary to have a constitutional text governing
society (New Zealand and Britain do not possess
constitutional texts)
– Constitution
• Includes the set of principles, practices,
understandings, and traditions that actually govern
society.
• Example: judicial review, right to privacy, innocent until
proven guilty, senatorial courtesy, executive privilege
Constitutional Interpretation
• What to interpret?
– Only the constitutional text? Or is it the larger
constitution?
– Do we interpret established practices that dictate
acceptable behavior?
• Does this mean some integral practices can achieve
“constitutional” status?
– How does the Constitution change?
• Is it only through the formal amendment process?
• How can we justify any other changes (are changes in
interpretation valid?)?
Constitutional Interpretation
• Who shall interpret?
– Who is responsible for interpreting the
Constitution? Judges? Other politicians?
– All public officials take an oath to uphold the
Constitution
• How can one uphold the principles if he/she cannot
interpret?
– Does authority to interpret involve more than
simply guessing at meaning?
• Authority to interpret means others will respect and
adhere to your interpretation
Constitutional Interpretation
• Who shall interpret?
– If judges only, where did they get this authority?
• Not stated in constitutional text, but part of constitution
• Judges stated they have sole power to interpret
Constitution
– Democratic theory says people have power to
interpret Constitution
• Necessarily involves electing individuals to interpret
• Federal judges not elected
• Constitution very comfortable with judicial review
Constitutional Interpretation
How to determine the constitutionality of law
• Statute enacted according to proper
procedure
– Passed by Congress and signed by President
• Authority must be grounded in…
– The explicit text of Constitution
– The implicit powers provided by Constitution
• Statute cannot violate
– Specific prohibitions listed in Constitution
– Any rights properly implied by Constitution