РефератыИностранный языкUSUS Supreme Court Essay Research Paper The

US Supreme Court Essay Research Paper The

US Supreme Court Essay, Research Paper


The Supreme Court is the highest governing body that is known to us as the


people of the United States of America. In the 1998-99 term, the Supreme Court


is slated to hear cases on subjects as diverse as business monopolies, labor


unions, health insurers, initiative petitions and due process. The justices will


also revisit the issue of sexual harassment. The following will just be an


overview of how the Supreme Court operates. I will try to point out many things


throughout the course of this paper. The first points I will try to show is who


the notable past judges were and what major roles they had in our society. Next,


I will move into the justices of today and try to give a brief overview of them.


Then I will move into the courts specifically. I will try to show how the courts


work, how the justices go about choosing cases, hearing arguments, and making


decisions. Lastly, I will give an overview of some of the most historic cases


that have been heard by the United States Supreme Court and their decisions. As


a result, all of these factors considered should help to give a better


understanding of the Supreme Court and how it functions. Since the Supreme


Court’s inception in 1789, 108 justices have served on it. There have been 16


chief justices. Several members of the court became great figures in history or


were distinguished for contributions beyond their court service. There are four


chief justices that have helped shape the course of the American judiciary


system and the nation’s overall progress. John Marshall, who served as chief


justice from 1801-1835, was probably the most influential chief justice to


serve. Often called the great chief justice, Marshall was instrumental in


establishing the court’s authority in the national government. During his


tenure, the court began issuing single, majority opinions, enabling it to speak


with a more definitive, unified voice. Rulings over this era bolstered federal


power over states. Marshall wrote the 1803 decision in Marbury versus Madison,


which established judicial review of laws, passed by Congress. Next, was Charles


Evans Hughes who served as associate justice 1910-1916 and chief justice


1930-1941. He presided over the court during the Great Depression and the New


Deal era. Next, was William Howard Taft, who served as chief justice 1921-1930.


He was the only person to serve as President from 1909-1913 and as chief


justice. President William G. Harding appointed Taft chief justice. He


successfully pressed Congress to pass laws that gave the court almost unlimited


discretion to decide which cases it will hear. Lastly was Earl Warren, who


served as chief justice from 1953-1969. This is another man that people would


really recognize because of his affiliation to the FBI. Warren, a former


California governor, was appointed by Republican President Eisenhower, and took


a decidedly liberal course in a socially stormy era. His legacy includes


decisions forbidding school segregation, fair mapping of voting districts, and


enhancing rights of defendants in criminal trials. Just a couple of small things


to add on an aside note are the first African-American chief justice was


Thurgood Marshall, who served from 1967-1991, and the first female chief justice


was Sandra Day O’Connor, who has served from1981-present. Next I would just like


to rundown the list of current justices that will be hearing cases for this


term. Note that I will try to list the current justices in their order of their


seniority, who they were appointed by, and what year they were appointed. The


top dog, also known as the chief justice, is William H. Rehnquist, who was


appointed associate justice by President Richard M. Nixon in 1971 and was later


elevated to chief justice by President Ronald Reagan in 1986. The next justice


is John Paul Stevens, appointed by President Gerald R. Ford in 1975. Next is


Sandra Day O’Connor appointed by President Reagan in1981. Antonin Scalia was


appointed by President Reagan also in 1986. The next justice in line would be


Anthony M. Kennedy who was appointed by President Reagan in 1988. The next


justice up the ladder is David Souter who was appointed justice by President


George Bush in 1990. The next justice is probably the most controversial figure


on the star panel. Clarence Thomas was appointed justice by President Bush in


1991. The two newest justices have recently been appointed by President Bill


Clinton. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was appointed in 1993 and Steven G. Breyer was


appointed in 1994. This is the team that will be overseeing the cases that are


chosen in the 1998-1999 term. The next aspect that I would like to show about


the United States Supreme Court is none other than how exactly it works. The


Supreme Court’s efforts to establish the law of the land began in secrecy and


mostly solitude. On Friday during the court’s term, which officially begins on


the first Monday in October, the nine justices meet in a small, wood-paneled


conference room to decide which cases they think are worth hearing. They meet


without law clerks, secretaries, or anyone else. The only people that are in the


room other than the justices are the junior justices, but we will get to know


them later. As a last resort for people who believe that lower courts have


failed the as an arbiter of the Constitution, the Supreme Court will, simply by


selecting a case, immediately lift the lives and human situations it contains to


national significance. Its rulings affect not only the two contesting parties,


known as petitioner and respondent, but may also change life for all Americans


for generations to come. About 7,000 petitions arrive by mail or messenger each


term at the "Marble Palace," as historian John Frank called the


court’s building on First Street just east of the Capitol. In the end, the


justices’ hand down about 80 signed rulings, each reflecting decades of legal


precedent, the current justices’ beliefs and personalities and the enduring


decorum that defines this 207-year-old institution, the least public of the


three branches of national government. The public normally notices only the


final decision in a case, but there is much more that occurs before that, most


of it behind the scenes in private debate, votes and negotiations among the


justices. Choosing cases is another issue the justices have to deal with during


the course of their terms. The justices determine which cases to take. They


never explain the reason for their choices. The important factors are whether


the legal question has been decided differently by two lower courts and needs


resolution by the high court, whether a lower court decision conflicts with an


existing Supreme Court ruling and whether the issue could have significance


beyond the two parties in the case. For example, the justices likely accepted


the sexual harassment case brought by Paula Jones, a former Arkansas state


employee, against President Clinton because it will test the important question


of whether a president should have to defend himself against a lawsuit while in


office. But the justices do not automatically take on all cases posing


significant societal dilemmas. Last June, for example, they refused to hear one


on the legality of college affirmative action programs. The case did not garner


the four votes needed to accept a petition for review and to schedule oral


arguments on it. Before those votes are cast in the closed-door session,


however, a case must pass over with several of the youngest, least experienced


lawyers in America-the 36 law clerks who serve the nine individual justices and


who, in effect, are their staff for a term. These clerks, most often four to a


justice, usually are recent law school graduates and typically the cream of


their Ivy League schools. It is the clerks who first consider the 7,000 or so


annual petitions, settling on the select few that they believe the justices


themselves should consider. There is no set number or quota for each week’s


conference. With the clerks’ memo in hand and in the closed conference room, the


justices summarily reject most of the appeals. They discuss petitions flagged by


one or more of the justices. Then, according to the justices’ public accounts


over the years, they vote aloud, one at a time by seniority but starting with


the chief justice. The chief justice is also in charge of running the meeting.


Among the richest sources of inside information about the court are papers of


the late Justice Thurgood Marshall from 1967-1991. They describe negotiations as


cases moved through the process. They show, for example, that only the bare


minimum of four votes did the justices accept a case that eventually yielded an


important 1990 ruling on religious freedom. Unlike the secret meeting to select


cases, the court’s next step is quite public. Oral arguments occur in the


Supreme Court’s stately, burgundy draped, gold-trimmed courtroom before a


first-come, first-seated public audience. On Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays,


starting in October, the justices’ listen to lawyers present each side of two or


three cases a day. In the 1980’s when the court accepted more cases, the


justices heard arguments in four cases a day. Limited to 30 minutes each, one


lawyer from each side makes his or her best arguments. The scene is tense and


dramatic as the justices, wearing black robes and sitting in individually sized,


black leather chairs, vigorously challenge the lawyers, sometimes consuming


large parts of their time allotments. Even experienced appellate advocates at


times become flustered or freeze as they stand at the lectern below the long


bench. Still, a lawyer’s appearance before the highest court can be the


highlight of a lawyer’s career. When the justices pose different hypothetical


situations, they are not necessarily trying to divert the lawyers. They are


looking at ways their decision might be applied in the future. The justices may


also use the occasion to influence other justices, bolstering one side and side


undermining the other. For all their attendant drama, oral arguments are only


one part of the decision making process. There also are written briefs submitted


by each side such as the views of the solicitor general, who is the federal


government’s top lawyer before the court and other friends of the court. Also,


the justices review previous cases on a subject, prepare their own


interpretations of the law or constitutional provisions and sometimes, though


rarely, turn to outside experts on the issue. For example, one of the most


controversial elements of the court’s unanimous decision in Brown versus Board


of Education (1954), striking down the "separate but equal" doctrine


long used to justify school segregation, was Chief Justice Earl Warren’s


reference to sociological and psychological studies. The studies concluded that


segregated schools stigmatized children. When it comes to making decisions, this


is a whole process in itself. The justices vote, sometimes more than once


because they may switch sides during the process. The first vote on a case is


taken in the week of oral arguments. For cases heard on Mondays, the justices’


vote on Wednesday afternoon, again in the secrecy of their conference room. For


cases heard on Tuesdays and Wednesdays, they vote Friday. After the vote, the


most senior justice is the majority assigns the task of writing the majority


opinion. The most senior justice on the losing side will decide who will write


the main opinion for the dissenting viewpoint. The other justices are free to


write their own statements if they wish, but the majority opinion speaks for the


court. Sometimes, justices say, writing an opinion that all justices in the


majority will sign is difficult. Sometimes, justices discover through writing an


opinion and trying to justify it with prior court rulings that the case was not


what it seemed. On occasion, the chief justice has thrown up his hands as the


majority switched from its original position. In many instances, the justices


may be perfectly pleased with what the author of the majority opinion is writing


but will offer thoughts for variations on the legal analysis or language. The


author’s task is to preserve his or her viewpoint, accommodate suggestions if it


means keeping the majority and not to turn off others in the group. Based on


what outsiders are able to discern from the justices’ public statements and from


the opening of once private papers of some justices, the justices do not trade


votes during this process. Rather, they engage in a constant conversation by way


of memo. The give and take can last for weeks and months. But fortunately, there


is June, when the court traditionally wraps up its work. Beginning in early May,


the court stops hearing oral arguments and increases its public release of


decisions. Rulings are traditionally handed down on Mondays, although the court


nears the end of the term, they are announced on other days, too. Law clerks are


heavily involved in this stage, writing draft opinions, researching past cases


that will support a ruling, even strategizing. The media are never told in


advance how many opinions to expect on a given day. Reporters will be told


whether it is a "regular" day, meaning four or fewer opinions, or a


"heavy" day meaning five or more. Returning to that very public forum


of the courtroom, the justice who has written the majority opinion briefly


announces the court’s ruling from the bench. As the court process ends and the


justices begin their long summer vacations, public response begins. No matter


how each term’s rulings change American government or individual lives, the nine


justices usually remain detached, almost never commenting on their work but


returning to their conference room each October to start the process again. The


Supreme Court has issued dozens of landmark rulings during its 207-year history,


and many shaped American government and the rights of individuals. While some


did nit endure, some as the 1857 "Dred Scott" ruling, all reflect the


mood of the court and dilemmas facing the country at historic times in history.


The following cases are those that have been most influential to us personally


one way or another. The case of Scott versus Sandford in 1857 is one that not to


many of us have heard, but it is an issue that we all know about. This ruling


declared that Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in the territories.


Dred Scott, a Missouri slave who had traveled to and worked in free states and


territories, asserted that he should be entitled to his freedom under the legal


principle "once free, always free." The next case that we will look at


is probably the most recognized Supreme Court decision known to date. The case


entitled Brown versus the Board of Education in 1954 is an example used by


teachers nationwide. This ruling struck down the "separate but equal"


doctrine that the court established in 1886 in Plessy versus Ferguson, which


permitted racial segregation of public facilities. The next case of historical


significance would be Miranda versus Arizona in 1966. This ruling required


police to inform suspects in custody of their right to remain silent, that


anything that they say may be used against them and they have right to


representation by a lawyer before interrogation. This is another example that


teachers use nationwide. The last example of an important Supreme Court ruling


that we would all have some idea of came down in 1973 in Roe versus Wade. This


ruling made abortion legal nationwide through a constitutional right to privacy.


In closing, I hope that this short interpretation helped us all learn a little


more about the United States Supreme Court system. For me personally, it helped


considerably in terms of the research and the structure that makes up the


Supreme Court. The finding of the present Supreme Court justices also helped in


that I can now read the newspaper and have an understanding of the people they


are referring to during the course of an article. The Supreme Court is the


highest governing body within the state and on the federal level. The United


States Supreme Court is the highest governing body known to us as an American


people and for the reasons stated earlier, I could see why.

Сохранить в соц. сетях:
Обсуждение:
comments powered by Disqus

Название реферата: US Supreme Court Essay Research Paper The

Слов:2916
Символов:19323
Размер:37.74 Кб.