The History of Supreme Court

The History of The Supreme Court Federalist 78  Alexander Hamilton Addressed the necessity of an independent judiciary.  See handout… The Appointment Process Appointed for life during good behavior  Appointed by the President  Subject to Senatorial consent.  In The Beginning…  Judiciary Act of 1789     Established the three tiered dual court system. Set the size of the Supreme Court at six. Section 25: Gave Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over federal questions arising in state supreme courts. Granted Supreme Court with original jurisdiction over issuing writs of mandamus. Forward Appeals Process Federal District Court Step One Federal Appeals Court Step Two Step Three: Case is appealed to the Supreme Court. The Court will either: 1. Affirm lower-court ruling 2. Remand case back to lower court for reconsideration. 3. Agree to put case on docket. Supreme Court rules on the case. Step Four Supreme Court Procedure Read Justice Brennan’s How the Supreme Court Arrives at Decisions Court Players and Opinions   Petitioner: Party appealing lower court’s decision Respondent: Party defending lower court’s decision Majority opinion - Court’s decision on a case and sets out reasoning. Concurring Opinion - is in agreement with the majority opinion but is written to add or emphasize a point. Dissenting Opinions - Written by justices who do not agree with the Court’s decision. Precedents: Standards set by the Court’s decisions to be used in interpreting future cases.     Two Problems Facing the First American Judiciary 1. Separation of Powers: Defining judicial power of the federal courts vis-à-vis the other branches.   Would not play advisory role to political branches. Would decide legal questions not political ones. 2. Federalism: Defining judicial power of the federal courts vis-à-vis the states.  Amendment 10 vs. Article VI The Two Marshall Courts 1. 1801-1824: Expansion of court’s power through constitutional interpretation.   Marbury v. Madison = Judicial Review McCulloch v. Maryland = Bank of the United States  The Power to tax is the power to destroy!  Gibbons v. Ogden = Competition, not monopoly, will secure economic advancement.  Capitalism wins! 2. 1824-1835: The retreat.   The Cherokee Cases and Andrew Jackson Contracts Clause: bending to state will A Comparison  What are the five similarities of the Marshall and Taney Courts: 1. 2. Limited government secured individual liberties Necessity of effective authority within state and federal government Interpreted the law to benefit capitalism Refused to disrupt social order 3. 4. 5. Expanded federal power Taney’s Legacy Dred Scott v. Sanford   Remember, Taney was a southerner… Ruled against Scott   Decision stood on interstate regulation grounds. Reconstruction and the Court  Reconstruction Amendments: 13th, 14th, 15th  National laws prohibiting states from depriving citizens of basic rights.  Slaughterhouse Cases  How did these cases throw the 14th amendment equal protection clause for a loop?  Louisiana butchers contested state health codes as depriving right to freely practice their occupations. The court found that the 14th amendment barred states from depriving only those “privileges and immunities” that Americans possessed as United States citizens as distinct from those they held as state citizens.   Racism in the Court  1898 – The Court created “Separate But Equal Doctrine,” in Plessy v. Ferguson. Does this jive with the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause  The Progressive Era Industrial Growth + Technological Advancement = Global Marketplace Major Issues Addressed by the Court in the Progressive Era: 1. 2. Laissez-faire constitutionalism Supported Dual Federalism: states given extraordinary leeway in regulating business. 3. Liberty of Contract See Lochner v. New York… The Progressive Era Liberty of Contract: Article I, Section 10, Clause 1 Lochner v. New York  Lochner = bakery owner  New York statute limiting hours bakers could work/week. S. Ct. found statute in violation of 14th amendment securing residents rights to enter into contracts free from governmental regulation. Affirmed laissez-faire doctrine and capitalism.   The Taft Court: The Roaring 20’s  Pro-Business/Anti-Labor decisions  Liberty of Contract v. Police Power of States  1923 - Adkins v. Children’s Hospital: Court struck down a minimum wage law for women.  In light of the 19th Amendment, women were no longer in need of price fixing.  What is police power?  Obligation of state government to provide for the general welfare of all residents. The Taft Court: The Roaring 20’s  Civil Liberties Prevail  Incorporation Argument: Bill of Rights guarantees should be extended to protect citizens from the states – see handout.  Nationalization of state criminal law  Powell v. Alabama (Scottsboro cases)  Majority declared that the 14th amendment’s DP clause required fair trials for state criminal defendants. The Crash, The New Deal and WWII  Chief Justice Charles E. Hughes - 1930     Pro-business attitude collapses with the Market. By 1937, FDR had filled the bench with liberals. New Deal legislation was routinely upheld. Protecting civil liberties takes a front seat.  Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone - 1941  Korematsu v. United States: argued under war powers of the president. The Vinson Court: The Cold War Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson - 1946  Judicial restraint abandoned freedom of thought, association, and expression  Dennis v. United States - 1951  Clear and Present Danger Test created to reason conviction of McCarthyism victims.  Separation of Powers Dilemma  Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer - 1952  Court overruled Truman’s seizure of nation’s steel mills to avoid an impending steelworker strike on the eve of the Korean conflict.  Further extended Incorporation The Warren Court: The Civil Rights Movement  Chief Justice Earl Warren – 1953  Brown v. Board of Education decision   Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson Fulfilled “cold war imperative”  Major facilitator of nationalizing criminal procedure – see handout Group Rights over Individual Rights  After Warren  Warren Burger – 1969  Delivered majority opinion in Nixon v. U.S. forcing the president to hand over the “tapes”. Advocate of judicial restraint Conservative reformer    William Rehnquist – 1986  As a law clerk to Justice Jackson, Rehnquist suggested the Court uphold Plessy in the Brown case.  His record shows support for law enforcement, strict incorporation, states-centered federalism. The Roberts Court What will be his legacy?   Read Time article