- Joined
- Dec 1, 2020
- Messages
- 8,469
- Reaction score
- 37,320
TL;DR: The final authority on legal interpretation of the US Constitution, the oldest extant charter of national government in the world. There are frequent threads started on specific SCOTUS decisions and the ethics of individual justices. This topic is created for general discussion, observation, and opinions with some historical background and emphasis on the post-DJT conservative majority serving as a right-wing sledgehammer to liberal activism, causes, and policy preferences of all types: abortion, affirmative action, gun control, climate change, environmental laws, federal regulations, and anti-MAGA. It's an opp for our Suredog legal scholars to flex and other posters to discuss and maybe even gain some knowledge.
"The [American] representative system of government has been adopted in several states of Europe, but I am unaware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power in the same manner as the Americans. A more imposing judiciary was never constituted by any people." -- Alexis de Tocqueville (1835)
The nearly 200-year-old observation holds today. In theory and on paper, the branch of government vested with the greatest amount of power is established immediately after the Preamble in Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution: United States Congress. The obvious caveat there is that legislative branch power is considerably less concentrated and spread much wider than the executive or judicial branches. In practice, the framers correctly presumed - and even intended - that it would rarely ever be able to act in super-majority lockstep fashion. It is exceedingly difficult these days for a political party to even hold simple majorities in both chambers for any longer than a single congressional cycle of two years. In times of extreme partisan gridlock, Congress is outright defective and cedes additional power to the SCOTUS practically by default. The gridlock, learn to love it.
The nine justices on the Supreme Court wield the incredible authority to not only circumscribe and restrict national policy but also enact and determine the scope of it themselves as constitutional interpretation can often be nearly indistinguishable from federal lawmaking. There have been a handful of landmark rulings with a profound impact on American history and society. The Marbury v. Madison (1803) case firmly established the concept of judicial review in the United States that gives the SCOTUS power to strike down both executive actions and congressional legislation alike as unconstitutional; it's something which was heavily implied in the Federalist Papers and can be inferred from the Constitution, but isn't explicity granted nor stated.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) held that black African Americans, regardless of whether free or enslaved, were not and could never be considered US citizens. It denied them any right to litigation in federal courts and directly perpetuated the institution of slavery. It was a major catalyst for exacerbating the tensions that led to the Civil War and a driving force for the 13th, 14th, and 15th Constitutional Amendments which in retrospect, are considered the cornerstone of America's 'Second Founding'. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruled that racial segregation was constitutional under "separate but equal" doctrine and legitimized the overtly discriminatory 'Jim Crow' laws passed in the southern United States at the end of the Reconstruction era.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) along with subsequent rulings overturned and reversed the "separate but equal" doctrine of racial segregation and provided a launching pad for the activism, legal challenges, and ultimately congressional legislation of the broader civil rights movement that came to define much of the societal upheaval in the 1960s. Loving v. Virginia (1967) struck down all anti-miscegenation state laws to legalize interracial marriage on a national level. Roe v. Wade (1973) struck down all state laws restricting and prohibiting abortion, legalizing it across the country. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) struck down and invalidated every existing state law that criminalized consensual same-sex activity.
District of Columbia vs. Heller (2008) overruled a general court precedent (of sorts) that had stood since 1876 and was the first 2nd Amendment decision to explicitly rule in favor of the individual right to possess firearms unconnected with any service in a militia, as well as to use them for purposes such as self-defense within a private residence. Citizens United vs. FEC (2010) struck down key provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act as unconstitutional, ruling that corporations and special interest groups are entitled to the same rights as individual citizens under 1st Amendment protections. Moreover, corporations are permitted to spend unlimited sums of money on political advertisements, communications, and campaigns.
Into the present-day: DJT had the opportunity to appoint three justices with optional lifetime tenures in a single four-year POTUS term due to a combination of the GOP's control over the US Senate, a deliberate FedSoc strategy implemented across the federal judiciary, and a fair amount of luck. The successful stalling of a confirmation hearing for Barack Obama's 2016 nomination (Merrick Garland) after the death of Antonin Scalia (1936-2016) made way for the prompt post-election appointment of Neil Gorsuch in 2017; the timely retirement of Anthony Kennedy allowed for his planned replacement with a judge 30 years younger in Brett Kavanaugh in 2018; the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020) only 45 days prior to the 2020 election completed the hat trick and saw the lightning quickfast confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.
(^ Thomas nominated by H.W. in 1991, but yeah)
Age as of October 1, 2024 (serving since):
52 - Amy Coney Barrett (2020)
54 - Kentaji Jackson (2022)
57 - Neil Gorsuch (2017)
59 - Brett Kavanaugh (2018)
64 - Elena Kagan (2010)
69 - John Roberts (2005)
70 - Sonia Sotomayor (2009)
74 - Samuel Alito (2006)
76 - Clarence Thomas (1991)
There's been no shortage of landmark decisions since the reconfiguration.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not confer a woman's substantive right to abortion. The court's decision overruled both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), returning to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion not protected by federal statutory law.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States related to the Second Amendment. The ruling struck down the Sullivan Act, a 1911 New York state law requiring applicants for a concealed carry license to show "proper cause" or "special need". Expanding on the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) decision, the court ruled that the Second Amendment also protects an individual's right to carry a firearm in public for the purposes of self-defense.
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that race-based affirmative action programs in college admission processes violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court ruled that race can not be used as a “plus” factor in any admissions decisions, even if part of a broader concentrated effort to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusion quotas.
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that local government ordinances with civil and criminal penalties for homeless people camping on public land do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the field of administrative law governing federal regulatory agencies. Together with its companion case, Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, it overruled the principle of Chevron deference established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984), which had directed courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguity in a law that the agency itself enforces.
Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court determined that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution presumptively extends to all of a president's official acts – with absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that Congress cannot regulate. The case extends from an ongoing federal trial to determine whether Donald Trump and others engaged in election interference during the 2020 election, including events during the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
"The [American] representative system of government has been adopted in several states of Europe, but I am unaware that any nation of the globe has hitherto organized a judicial power in the same manner as the Americans. A more imposing judiciary was never constituted by any people." -- Alexis de Tocqueville (1835)
The nearly 200-year-old observation holds today. In theory and on paper, the branch of government vested with the greatest amount of power is established immediately after the Preamble in Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution: United States Congress. The obvious caveat there is that legislative branch power is considerably less concentrated and spread much wider than the executive or judicial branches. In practice, the framers correctly presumed - and even intended - that it would rarely ever be able to act in super-majority lockstep fashion. It is exceedingly difficult these days for a political party to even hold simple majorities in both chambers for any longer than a single congressional cycle of two years. In times of extreme partisan gridlock, Congress is outright defective and cedes additional power to the SCOTUS practically by default. The gridlock, learn to love it.
The nine justices on the Supreme Court wield the incredible authority to not only circumscribe and restrict national policy but also enact and determine the scope of it themselves as constitutional interpretation can often be nearly indistinguishable from federal lawmaking. There have been a handful of landmark rulings with a profound impact on American history and society. The Marbury v. Madison (1803) case firmly established the concept of judicial review in the United States that gives the SCOTUS power to strike down both executive actions and congressional legislation alike as unconstitutional; it's something which was heavily implied in the Federalist Papers and can be inferred from the Constitution, but isn't explicity granted nor stated.
Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) held that black African Americans, regardless of whether free or enslaved, were not and could never be considered US citizens. It denied them any right to litigation in federal courts and directly perpetuated the institution of slavery. It was a major catalyst for exacerbating the tensions that led to the Civil War and a driving force for the 13th, 14th, and 15th Constitutional Amendments which in retrospect, are considered the cornerstone of America's 'Second Founding'. Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) ruled that racial segregation was constitutional under "separate but equal" doctrine and legitimized the overtly discriminatory 'Jim Crow' laws passed in the southern United States at the end of the Reconstruction era.
Brown v. Board of Education (1954) along with subsequent rulings overturned and reversed the "separate but equal" doctrine of racial segregation and provided a launching pad for the activism, legal challenges, and ultimately congressional legislation of the broader civil rights movement that came to define much of the societal upheaval in the 1960s. Loving v. Virginia (1967) struck down all anti-miscegenation state laws to legalize interracial marriage on a national level. Roe v. Wade (1973) struck down all state laws restricting and prohibiting abortion, legalizing it across the country. Lawrence v. Texas (2003) struck down and invalidated every existing state law that criminalized consensual same-sex activity.
District of Columbia vs. Heller (2008) overruled a general court precedent (of sorts) that had stood since 1876 and was the first 2nd Amendment decision to explicitly rule in favor of the individual right to possess firearms unconnected with any service in a militia, as well as to use them for purposes such as self-defense within a private residence. Citizens United vs. FEC (2010) struck down key provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act as unconstitutional, ruling that corporations and special interest groups are entitled to the same rights as individual citizens under 1st Amendment protections. Moreover, corporations are permitted to spend unlimited sums of money on political advertisements, communications, and campaigns.
Into the present-day: DJT had the opportunity to appoint three justices with optional lifetime tenures in a single four-year POTUS term due to a combination of the GOP's control over the US Senate, a deliberate FedSoc strategy implemented across the federal judiciary, and a fair amount of luck. The successful stalling of a confirmation hearing for Barack Obama's 2016 nomination (Merrick Garland) after the death of Antonin Scalia (1936-2016) made way for the prompt post-election appointment of Neil Gorsuch in 2017; the timely retirement of Anthony Kennedy allowed for his planned replacement with a judge 30 years younger in Brett Kavanaugh in 2018; the death of Ruth Bader Ginsburg (1933-2020) only 45 days prior to the 2020 election completed the hat trick and saw the lightning quickfast confirmation of Amy Coney Barrett.
(^ Thomas nominated by H.W. in 1991, but yeah)
Age as of October 1, 2024 (serving since):
52 - Amy Coney Barrett (2020)
54 - Kentaji Jackson (2022)
57 - Neil Gorsuch (2017)
59 - Brett Kavanaugh (2018)
64 - Elena Kagan (2010)
69 - John Roberts (2005)
70 - Sonia Sotomayor (2009)
74 - Samuel Alito (2006)
76 - Clarence Thomas (1991)
There's been no shortage of landmark decisions since the reconfiguration.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, 597 U.S. 215 (2022), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment does not confer a woman's substantive right to abortion. The court's decision overruled both Roe v. Wade (1973) and Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992), returning to individual states the power to regulate any aspect of abortion not protected by federal statutory law.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States related to the Second Amendment. The ruling struck down the Sullivan Act, a 1911 New York state law requiring applicants for a concealed carry license to show "proper cause" or "special need". Expanding on the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) decision, the court ruled that the Second Amendment also protects an individual's right to carry a firearm in public for the purposes of self-defense.
Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that race-based affirmative action programs in college admission processes violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The court ruled that race can not be used as a “plus” factor in any admissions decisions, even if part of a broader concentrated effort to achieve diversity, equity, and inclusion quotas.
City of Grants Pass v. Johnson, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court held that local government ordinances with civil and criminal penalties for homeless people camping on public land do not constitute cruel and unusual punishment prohibited by the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the field of administrative law governing federal regulatory agencies. Together with its companion case, Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, it overruled the principle of Chevron deference established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984), which had directed courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of an ambiguity in a law that the agency itself enforces.
Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. (2024), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in which the court determined that presidential immunity from criminal prosecution presumptively extends to all of a president's official acts – with absolute immunity for official acts within an exclusive presidential authority that Congress cannot regulate. The case extends from an ongoing federal trial to determine whether Donald Trump and others engaged in election interference during the 2020 election, including events during the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
:focal(3x0:2997x1737)/static.texastribune.org/media/files/ee1730abcbeb29f6d95d8c0f25055962/0719%20Abortion%20Hearing%20Presser%20JT%2009%20TT.jpg)
