Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Supreme Court

Good Essays
1080 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States. It has ultimate (but largely discretionary) appellate jurisdiction over all federal courts and over state court cases involving issues of federal law, and original jurisdiction over a small range of cases. The Court, which meets in the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., consists of a chief justice and eight associate justices who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the United States Senate. Once appointed, justices have life tenure unless they resign, retire, or are removed after impeachment.
Under Chief Justices Jay, Rutledge, and Ellsworth (1789–1801), the Court heard few cases; its first decision was West v. Barnes (1791), a case involving a procedural issue. The Court lacked a home of its own and had little prestige, a situation not helped by the highest-profile case of the era, Chisholm v. Georgia, which was immediately repudiated by the Eleventh Amendment.
The Court's power and prestige waxed during the Marshall Court (1801–1835). Under Marshall, the Court established the principle of judicial review, including specifying itself as the supreme expositor of the Constitution (Marbury v. Madison) and made several important constitutional rulings giving shape and substance to the balance of power between the federal government and the states (prominently, Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden).
The Marshall Court also ended the practice of each justice issuing his opinion seriatim, a remnant of British tradition, and instead issuing a single majority opinion. Also during Marshall's tenure, although beyond the Court's control, the impeachment and acquittal of Justice Samuel Chase in 1804-1805 helped cement the principle of judicial independence.
The Taney Court (1836–1864) made several important rulings, such as Sheldon v. Sill, which held that while Congress may not limit the subjects the Supreme Court may hear, it may limit the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts to prevent them from hearing cases dealing with certain subjects, Nevertheless, it is primarily remembered for its ruling in Dred Scott v. Sand ford, which may have helped precipitate the Civil War. In the Reconstruction era, the Chase, Waite, and Fuller Courts (1864–1910) interpreted the new Civil War amendments to the Constitution and developed the doctrine of substantive due process.
Under the White and Taft Courts (1910–1930), the Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment had incorporated some guarantees of the Bill of Rights against the states, grappled with the new antitrust statutes (Standard Oil Co. of New Jersey v. United States), upheld the constitutionality of military conscription (Selective Draft Law Cases) and brought the substantive due process doctrine to its first apogee (Adkins v. Children's Hospital).
During the Hughes, Stone, and Vinson Courts (1930–1953), the Court gained its own accommodation in 1935 and changed its interpretation of the Constitution, giving a broader reading to the powers of the federal government to facilitate President Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal. During World War II, the Court continued to favor government power, upholding the internment of Japanese citizens and the mandatory pledge of allegiance. Nevertheless, was soon repudiated, and the Steel Seizure Case restricted the pro-government trend.
The Warren Court (1953–1969) dramatically expanded the force of Constitutional civil liberties. It held that segregation in public schools violates equal protection Brown v. Board of Education. Sharpe and Green v. County School and that traditional legislative district boundaries violated the right to vote . It created a general right to privacy, limited the role of religion in public school, incorporated most guarantees of the Bill of Rights against the State prominently Gideon v. Wainwright and required that criminal suspects be apprised of all these rights by police. At the same time, however, the Court limited defamation suits by public figures and supplied the government with an unbroken run of antitrust victories.
The Burger Court (1969–1986) expanded Griswold's right to privacy to strike down abortion laws, but divided deeply on affirmative action and campaign finance regulation , and dithered on the death penalty, ruling first that most applications were defective , then that the death penalty itself was not unconstitutional.
The Rehnquist Court (1986–2005) was noted for its revival of judicial enforcement of federalism, emphasizing the limits of the Constitution's affirmative grants of power and the force of its restrictions on those powers. It struck down single-sex state schools as a violation of equal protection, laws against sodomy as violations of substantive due process, and the line item veto, but upheld school vouchers and reaffirmed Roe's restrictions on abortion laws. The Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, which ended the electoral recount during the presidential election of 2000, became controversial.
The Roberts Court 2005 present is regarded by some as more conservative than the Rehnquist Court. Some of its major rulings have concerned federal preemption, civil procedure, the Bill of Rights, prominently Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (First Amendment), Heller-McDonald (Second Amendment), and (Eighth Amendment).
Article III of the United States Constitution leaves it to Congress to fix the number of justices. The Judiciary Act of 1789 called for the appointment of six justices, and as the nation's boundaries grew, Congress added justices to correspond with the growing number of judicial circuits: seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and ten in 1863.
In 1866, at the behest of Chief Justice Chase, Congress passed an act providing that the next three justices to retire would not be replaced, which would thin the bench to seven justices by attrition. Consequently, one seat was removed in 1866 and a second in 1867. In 1869, however, the Circuit Judges Act returned the number of justices to nine, where it has since remained.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court in 1937. His proposal envisioned appointment of one additional justice for each incumbent justice who reached the age of 70 years 6 months and refused retirement, up to a maximum bench of 15 justices. The proposal was ostensibly to ease the burden of the docket on elderly judges, but the actual purpose was widely understood as an effort to pack the Court with justices who would support Roosevelt's New Deal. The plan, usually called the "Court-packing Plan", failed in Congress. Nevertheless, the Court's balance began to shift within months when Justice van Deventer retired and was replaced by Senator Hugo Black. By the end of 1941, Roosevelt had appointed seven justices and elevated Harlan Fiske Stone to Chief Justice.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    In Marbury v. Madison (1803) the supreme court had announced for the first time the concept that a court has the right to declare an act of congress void if it is inconsistent with the constitution. In addition William Marbury was an intended recipient of an appointment as a justice of the peace in the area of Columbia. Then when James Madison, Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state, he refused to deliver Marbury’s commission. Marbury and 3 others joined and petitioned for a writ of mandamus compelling delivery of the…

    • 90 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Apush Chapter 12 Study Guide

    • 2265 Words
    • 10 Pages

    John Marshall (September 24, 1755 – July 6, 1835) was an American jurist and statesman who shaped American constitutional law and made the Supreme Court a center of power. Marshall was Chief Justice of the United States, serving from January 31, 1801, until his death in 1835.…

    • 2265 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison:(1803) Judicial review In 1801, Justice William Marbury was to have received a commission from President Adams, but Secretary of State James Madison refused to issue the commission. Chief Justice Marshall stated that the Judiciary Act of 1789, which was the basis for Marbury's claim, conflicted with Article III of the Constitution. Marbury did not receive the commission. This case determined that the Supreme Court and not the states would have the ultimate word on whether an issue was in violation of the Constitution. The ruling, based on judicial review, made the Judicial Branch equal to the other two branches of government.…

    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    In 1803, a single case managed to change how America's government would be run forever. In John Adams' last few days as president, he appointed a small group of Federalists into power. When Thomas Jefferson was elected into office, and he told James Madison to not bring the commissions to an appointed “midnight judge” named William Marbury. This gave the newly appointed Chief Justice, John Marshall, a great opportunity to spread his Federalist influence deeper into the American government. When Marbury found out that his commission was being held back by Madison, he sued for its delivery.…

    • 375 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    1. John Marshall means in his statement that the constitution does not allow the judiciary branch to rule in such a way that Marbury would like. Although Marbury did lose his job, the context in which he earned his job was unconstitutional. Marshall's statement is referring to the inability of the judiciary branch to compensate Marbury for a job which was given in an unconstitutional way.…

    • 828 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the early national period, the judiciary was the weakest of the three branches of government. When Chief Justice John Marshall established the principle of judicial review in MarburyMadison by declaring an act of Congress unconstitutional, he greatly strengthened the judiciary. Even though the high court exercised this prerogative only one other time prior to the Civil War (Dred Scott v. Sanford), the establishment of judicial review made the judiciary more of an equal player with the executive and legislative branches.…

    • 325 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Written by Chief Justice John Marshall, the majority ruled that while Marbury was entitled to receive his commission and that courts are able to grant remedies, the Supreme Court did not have the right to grant the plaintiff his legal order. The reasoning behind this was that Marbury’s request was based on a law passed by Congress that the Court deemed unconstitutional (Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789). The Court then stated that when the Constitution and the law conflict, it is the Supreme Court’s duty to uphold the law of the land and rule in unity with the Constitution.…

    • 580 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. The decision helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the American form of…

    • 699 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Marshall strengthened the power of the federal government by expanding the power of the federal judiciary. Becoming Supreme Court Justice in 1801, John Marshall defined the judicial branch as a power in the US government for the first time. Before this point in time the judicial branch was weak and served little purpose. The Supreme Court had little power to check and balance the legislative and executive branches as intended. Marshall’s rulings on controversial cases like Marbury v. Madison (1803), Fletcher v. Peck (1809), and McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) laid the foundation for what we know today as a powerful judicial branch.…

    • 433 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Take an edge on whether or not or not you suspect the Supreme Court is attentive to popular opinion. Examine the extent to that popular opinion ought to have an effect on Supreme Court choices. Support your response with a minimum of 3 (3) samples of the perceived effects of popular opinion on Supreme Court choices.…

    • 245 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The final issue before the Court was to validate their authority in the issuing of writs of mandamus. Since the court held that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional because…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Supreme Court Major Cases

    • 4278 Words
    • 18 Pages

    The commissions were signed by President Adams and sealed by acting Secretary of State John Marshall (who later became Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and author of this opinion), but they were not delivered before the termination of Adams’s presidency. Thomas Jefferson refused to honor the commissions, claiming that they were invalid because they had not been delivered by the end of Adams’s term.…

    • 4278 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The American Supreme Court has been in place ever since the Judiciary Act of 1789. Since then, a number of important precedential cases have been tackled by the judges of the court. One of these aforementioned cases is that of 1807’s United State v. Aaron Burr, in which the fledgling court prosecuted Aaron Burr on account of treason.…

    • 649 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In 1932, the Powell vs Alabama Case reversed the convictions of nine black men who were accused of raping two white women. All the defendants, apart from one, were sentenced to death after a series of one-day trials and they were given minimal access to their lawyers before their trials which meant their defenses weren’t precisely planned. The convictions were reversed because the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that they weren't given a fair trial, they were denied legal counsel, and the juries excluded members of their race. This was a significant ruling because the Supreme Court had recognised that African Americans were being treated unconstitutionally, and the little rights that they did have, had been violated. This evidence shows that the Supreme Court was important in assisting African Americans achieve their civil rights because the Courts had accepted that African…

    • 1033 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    The Judiciary

    • 2416 Words
    • 8 Pages

    This question raises the issues of the constitutional position of the judiciary and the significance of judicial independence for the operation of the rule of law. We will consider recent changes to the leadership of the judiciary and the process of judicial appointment.…

    • 2416 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Better Essays