The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. Simplified Revision Notes for A-Level Edexcel Politics
Revision notes with simplified explanations to understand The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. quickly and effectively.
Learn about Race and rights in contemporary US politics for your A-Level Politics Exam. This Revision Note includes a summary of Race and rights in contemporary US politics for easy recall in your Politics exam
368+ students studying
Race and rights in contemporary US politics Quizzes
Test your knowledge with quizzes.
Race and rights in contemporary US politics Flashcards
Practice with bite-sized questions.
Race and rights in contemporary US politics Questions by Topic
Prepare with real exam question.
20.6.1 The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court.
Appointment Process
Politicized Aspect:
Increasing Partisanship: Supreme Court appointments have become highly politicized, with partisan considerations influencing nominations. Key examples include:
Merrick Garland vs. Amy Coney Barrett: Garland's nomination was blocked by the Senate, whereas Barrett's appointment was expedited just before the 2020 election.
Brett Kavanaugh: Confirmed with a narrow 50-48 vote largely along party lines, showcasing the growing partisanship in confirmation votes.
Impact of Conservative Appointments: Trump's appointments of three conservative justices, including Barrett, led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade, illustrating how political motivations can affect the Court's decisions and societal norms.
Judicial Nature:
Extensive Vetting: Despite political influences, the appointment process involves detailed scrutiny of judicial philosophies and past rulings:
Ketanji Brown Jackson: Her nomination involved a thorough examination of her judicial record, focusing on her qualifications rather than just political alignment.
Judicial Activism
Political Aspect:
Influence of Political and Personal Views: Judicial activism arises when rulings reflect personal or political biases rather than strict legal interpretation. Examples include:
Warren Court Era: Landmark decisions like Brown v. Board of Education and Miranda v. Arizona advanced civil rights and liberties.
Recent Conservative Activism: Decisions such as Columbia v. Heller and Citizens United v. FEC showcase a shift towards conservative interpretations, including the recent overturning of Roe v. Wade.
Judicial Nature:
Judicial Restraint and Originalism: Some argue that recent decisions reflect a return to judicial restraint or originalism:
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Overturned Roe v. Wade based on an originalist view, reflecting judicial restraint.
Obergefell v. Hodges and Bostock v. Clayton County: Illustrate judicial restraint by interpreting the Constitution as written.
Riley v. California: Expanded privacy rights to modern technology, showing judicial activism as necessary to address gaps in legislative policies.
Political System
Political Aspect:
Impact on Policy and Agendas: Supreme Court decisions can significantly impact political agendas and public policy:
Biden's Student Loan Forgiveness Plan (2023): The Court's decision to strike down this plan halted a central part of Biden's domestic policy, reflecting the Court's political impact.
Judicial Nature:
Role in Adjudication: The Supreme Court's primary function is to uphold and interpret the Constitution:
Trump's Disqualification Case (2023): The Court's unanimous decision to allow Trump to run for office demonstrates its commitment to constitutional principles over political influence.
Check and Balance: The Court's role in ensuring executive compliance with the law involves political ramifications but remains focused on constitutional adjudication.
Interpretative Approaches: Living Constitution vs. Originalism
Living Constitution:
Evolving Interpretation: This approach suggests the Constitution should adapt to contemporary society, supported by its broad and flexible language:
Obergefell v. Hodges: Used the 14th Amendment to legalize same-sex marriage, reflecting modern views.
Roe v. Wade: Initially expanded privacy rights to include abortion.
Riley v. California: Applied the Fourth Amendment to modern digital technology.
Originalism:
Fixed Meaning: Originalism argues for a fixed interpretation of the Constitution based on its original meaning and the intent of the framers:
Citizens United v. FEC: Interpreted the First Amendment to protect corporate speech.
Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization: Overturned Roe v. Wade, arguing that the Constitution does not guarantee a right to abortion.
Justice Clarence Thomas: Known for his originalist approach, focusing on historical context and framers' intent.
Only available for registered users.
Sign up now to view the full note, or log in if you already have an account!
500K+ Students Use These Powerful Tools to Master The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. For their A-Level Exams.
Enhance your understanding with flashcards, quizzes, and exams—designed to help you grasp key concepts, reinforce learning, and master any topic with confidence!
20 flashcards
Flashcards on The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court.
Other Revision Notes related to The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. you should explore
Discover More Revision Notes Related to The political versus judicial nature of the Supreme Court. to Deepen Your Understanding and Improve Your Mastery