The Supreme Court, also known as the court of last resort or the court of appeals, is the highest judicial body within the American court system. It consists of nine Supreme Court Justices that are appointed by the President of the United States. Their decisions are based solely on constitutional matters. Their rulings are not subject to further review by any other court and cannot be appealed against. The Supreme Court sees over federal cases and cases against states, it is the ultimate body of judicial power in America. Our representative democracy has reserved this great authority for a judicial body that is appointed and not elected nor is it subject to recall by the people. With all the decisions the Supreme Court has made since its establishment in 1789 and with only the people’s faith that their elected President will choose the proper Supreme Court Justices, the question is: Does the Supreme Court use its authority wisely? The answer, for the most part, is yes. Every person and governing entity will make mistakes, surely, and the Supreme Court has mostly likely made theirs, but overall the United States Supreme Court uses its power of law and appeals to govern the American court system in a wise fashion. Evidence of this can be seen in many of the Supreme Court Cases involving Americans’ first right: The Freedom of Speech. The Freedom of Speech has constantly been called into question. Can we dictate what people say? If people oppose us through speech can we stop them? What and how far can people go with their right of speech? This questions and more have all had to be answered by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court’s answers can be seen in the court cases of Schenck v. United States, Feiner v. New York, and ... ... middle of paper ... ... clear and present danger that then a price would have to be paid. Feiner v. New York just further emphasized that if one’s right to speech infringes on the rights of safety and order of the American people, then it is no longer protected under the First Amendment. Lastly there is the case of Brandenburg v. Ohio, which redefined the First Amendment, giving it more power, and the clear and present danger test, making it so that a clear and present danger must truly be present and be able to be proven. With these cases it is still true that the Supreme Court does use their authority wisely. In these cases they Supreme Court defended the constitutional right of Freedom of Speech, while at the same time limiting the right so that it would not infringe on the rights of other Americans or America as a whole. Through this the Court has done its job and has done it well.
early twentieth centuries the Supreme Court of the United States tended to rule in ways that were not favorable to minority populations, from the late twentieth century onward, The Supreme Court generally ruled in ways that were favorable to minority populations, including African Americans, Asian Americans, homosexuals, and those who share minority opinions. In other words, when compared to the Supreme Court of the nineteenth and early twentieth century, the Supreme Court in the last sixty years has
The Difference between Judicial Activism and Judicial Restraint Our American judiciary branch of the federal government has contributed and molded our American beliefs in this great nation. This branch of government is respected because of the code of conduct that the judges, no matter how conservative or liberal. The language of the court as well as the uniform of the cloaks that judges wear has most probably contributed towards this widespread respect. Throughout the history of the United
1800s, most commonly strengthening the power of the federal government. After John Adams filled the new spots for federal judgeships with Federalists, these judges, led by the Federalist Supreme Court Justice John Marshall, used their Federalist ideals to determine verdicts, thereby greatly influencing politics with Federalist ideas and precedents in the early 1800s. For example, In Marbury v. Madison, William Marbury had been appointed justice of the peace for the District of Columbia in the final
of "judicial review," the Supreme Court 's power to determine whether a law is constitutional or unconstitutional. While the idea of judicial review was not new at the time, the decision in Marbury helped to establish the role of the judiciary and spelled out the role of the Supreme Court within the structure of the U.S. government. At the same time, Marshall 's opinion appeared impartial to the political aspects of the case in an attempt to demonstrate that politics should not interfere with legal
In 1803, the decision in Marbury v Madison held that the Supreme Court had the ability to practice the process of judicial review. With this ruling, the Court gave itself the power to deem legislation constitutional or unconstitutional. With this bolstered power, the Supreme Court made numerous landmark decisions throughout the 19th and during the first half of the 20th centuries. The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review played an integral role in shaping post-bellum racial laws and attitudes
order to establish a well-developed and just government, however others disagree that Church and State are conjoined; it is impossible to implicate one and not the other. For example in the book Politics and Religion in the United States, Michael and Julia Colbert discuss state “although religion and politics are not the same their realms overlap. This is especially true with regard with values, {as well as] concern power over the lives of people... However, particular activist groups across the U.S
The American Judicial system has proved to be more troublesome and controversial than the founding fathers would have imagined. The debate on whether judicial activism or judicial restraint is the best idea for the country to follow has been long living. Both judicial activism and judicial restraint are described as types of judicial review. While both can be beneficial, Judicial activism is clearly more important than the other. Judicial restraint is “The judicial philosophy whose adherents
The supreme court case of Obergefell v. Hodges is one huge reason why we have same-sex marriage as of today. Richard Hodges is the defendant while James Obergefell is the plaintiff. As a result of this case, states are unable to pass laws that limit marriage of same-sex couples. It requires all states to license marriages between these couples, and makes states recognise marriages made outside of said states. Before this case, there were several other cases that supported similar, but not exact situations
Less than a decade ago, a monumental Supreme Court case, that many have heard of, took place. The court case was between Citizens United, a nonprofit conservative leading organization, and the Federal Election Commission, which regulates the amount of money being donated to politicians and their political parties. The court case was very divisive because it brought into question whether or not a corporation had the right to protected political speech just like an individual person does. Citizens
President Barack Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor for Supreme Court justice on May 26, 2009, making Sonia Sotomayor the first Hispanic female to be nominated for higher court. Sonia Sotomayor was born on June 25, 1954. She is currently a federal judge on the U.S Courts of Appeals for a Second Circuit. If nominated she will be replacing the retiring Justice David Souter and she will also be the first Hispanic and the third female Justice. This will be a huge milestone for the Hispanic community. Looking
The 1850s was one of the most decisive decades in American History; because of its politics, social roles, and court cases, all of which led to the American Civil War. America in the 1850s was centered around the ideology of Manifest Destiny, prompting the desire to have the United States reign over territory from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific. This ideal caused political chaos in Washington, as the divide between proslavery and antislavery politicians grew with the admission of more states
This decision expanded the power of the Supreme court in general by establishing the principle of judicial review (the power to declare a law unconstitutional) and declaring that the Supreme Court had the power of judicial review with original jurisdiction. This decision was considered the biggest pyrrhic victory for Thomas Jefferson because he was not forced to deliver the commission to Marbury, but his executive powers were diminished with the Court not having the power to decide the constitutionality
These limitations warrant a broader investigation into other politicized issues. The Supreme Court highly politicized the two issues we focus on, with abortion arguably being the most politicized topic in our country, so our research cannot extend to all Supreme Court issues, especially those which are not as politically polarizing. However, it is reasonable to expect that other high profile issues, such as the death penalty
authority. One of the three rules of American Politics is that voters are more likely to vote for politicians who act, look, and sound like textbook Republicans. The average voter is middle-aged, white, and has high level education. Another rule of American Politics is that voters prefer politicians who vote along the democratic way of
history. It is also the most copied Constitution in the world. Many nations have taken the ideals and values from our Constitution and instilled them in their own. It is amazing to think that after 200 years, it still holds relevance to our nation's politics and procedures. However, regardless of how important this document is to our government, the operation remains time consuming and ineffective. The U.S. Constitution established an inefficient system that encourages careful deliberation between