In This Article
30-Second Summary
Headline Links: Preview of the new term, the Supreme Court’s full docket, and how to stay up-to-date
Background: An introduction to the Supreme Court, split decisions in the past, and how the court decides to hear a case
Analysis: Examining the new term and what it may reveal about the court
Historical Perspective: A history of the Supreme Court, landmark decisions, and the changing number of justices
Reference Material: Glossary of legal terms, biographies of the justices, and what Americans do not know
Related Topics: Key cases in the Supreme Court’s new term
Subscribe to Politics Updates
Supreme Court Faces Politically Charged Cases
by
findingDulcinea Staff
The U.S. Supreme Court’s new term began on Oct. 1 with a docket full of contentious partisan cases; whereas some observers say the last term marked the court’s rightward shift, analysts believe this term will bring a broader mix of conservative and liberal victories.
30-Second Summary
The U.S. Supreme Court’s docket for the next nine months includes high-profile cases involving the rights of Guantanamo Bay prisoners, voter identification requirements, and the lawfulness of lethal injection. Given such controversial issues, pundits expect a term of split decisions and rulings with far-reaching political implications.
As with many of the high-profile cases of last term, this term’s most contentious cases may hinge on the tie-breaking vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy. But whether this centrist swing voter will cast his lot with the court’s liberal or conservative blocs remains to be seen.
Trying to anticipate the court’s political leaning, Mimi Wesson, professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, thinks that the “justices' track records on [this term’s issues] suggest that the court's liberal members have a chance of crafting a majority.”
Tom Goldstein, professor of Supreme Court litigation at Stanford and Harvard law schools, complicates Wesson’s point. Writing on “SCOTUS Blog,” Goldstein points out that “Kennedy's commitment to any ideological world view is too fragile for either wing of the Court to have genuine confidence in … Moreover, many important cases are not decided on ideological grounds or by five-to-four majorities.”
This term is also the last before the 2008 presidential elections, which places special significance on how the court affects the political landscape. Knowing how and why the land’s highest legal authority influences American culture is more important than ever.
As with many of the high-profile cases of last term, this term’s most contentious cases may hinge on the tie-breaking vote of Justice Anthony Kennedy. But whether this centrist swing voter will cast his lot with the court’s liberal or conservative blocs remains to be seen.
Trying to anticipate the court’s political leaning, Mimi Wesson, professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, thinks that the “justices' track records on [this term’s issues] suggest that the court's liberal members have a chance of crafting a majority.”
Tom Goldstein, professor of Supreme Court litigation at Stanford and Harvard law schools, complicates Wesson’s point. Writing on “SCOTUS Blog,” Goldstein points out that “Kennedy's commitment to any ideological world view is too fragile for either wing of the Court to have genuine confidence in … Moreover, many important cases are not decided on ideological grounds or by five-to-four majorities.”
This term is also the last before the 2008 presidential elections, which places special significance on how the court affects the political landscape. Knowing how and why the land’s highest legal authority influences American culture is more important than ever.
Headline Links: Preview of the new term, the Supreme Court’s full docket, and how to stay up-to-date
The first contentious case on the court’s docket—Kimbrough v. United States—begins Oct. 2. It concerns the much longer sentences given for the possession or trafficking of “crack” cocaine compared with powder cocaine. In addition to the case’s wide impact on judicial discretion in sentencing, some analysts expect the ruling to serve as a litmus test for whether the court will exhibit liberal or conservative tendencies in the term’s other high-profile cases. Legal Times provides a rundown of the term’s most important cases.
Source: Legal Times
“The Daily Writ,” a legal and political news blog, offers the complete docket of cases being heard during the Supreme Court’s 2007 term, with links to arguments, briefs and questions presented.
Source: The Daily Writ
The Willamette University College of Law provides same-day updates on the cases and arguments being heard by the Supreme Court. The Web site also offers a preview of the issues facing the court in the form of issue outlines posted on the site one week before the presentation of oral arguments.
Source: The Willamette University College of Law Web site
Oyez, a Supreme Court news site, features a live audio feed to Supreme Court hearings, as well as a catalog of prior recordings dating back to 1950.
Source: Oyez
Background: An introduction to the Supreme Court, split decisions in the past, and how the court decides to hear a case
In January 2007, PBS aired a documentary series titled “The Supreme Court.” The Web site created in conjunction with that series offers a wide array of in-depth information on the court, its history and its members. The site includes video and audio features, including two rare interviews with Chief Justice John Roberts and former Justice Sandra Day O’Connor.
Source: PBS
The Wall Street Journal offers a detailed graphic illustrating how the justices split on some of last term’s most divisive cases. The same page also provides links to each case’s arguments and opinion.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
The Journal provides the same information for the 2006 term, though without the arguments and opinion.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
During the years immediately following its formation, the Supreme Court was required to hear and rule on every appeal that came before it. But as its caseload quickly became unwieldy, the court gradually sought greater control over the selection process. Today, the Supreme Court uses the writ of certiorari to determine which cases it will hear. Federal Judge Peter J. Messitte explains the origins of cert, as it is known for short, and how the court uses it today.
Source: The State Department's eJournal USA: Issues of Democracy
Analysis: Examining the new term and what it may reveal about the court
With so many contentious partisan issues coming before the Supreme Court this term, The Christian Science Monitor expects Justice Anthony Kennedy’s vote to be more important than ever. As a centrist swing voter, Kennedy proved the deciding factor in a number of last term’s markedly conservative decisions. However, analysts think that in the coming months Kennedy’s ideological leanings on the issues now facing the court may show him more sympathetic to the court’s liberal bloc.
Source: The Christian Science Monitor
Tom Goldstein, head of the law firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld’s Supreme Court practice and professor of Supreme Court litigation at Stanford and Harvard law schools, examines the political prospects of the new term. He concludes that there will not be the kind of liberal turnaround that some analysts expect: “The upcoming term won't end as this one did, with headlines and TV reports describing the court as profoundly conservative, triggering praise from the right and howls of protest from the left. Instead, we will see (mistaken) talk of the court's ‘surprising’ tack back to the left. In fact, this commentary will be wrong: The justices and their views will be exactly the same come June 2008; it is the cases that will be different. But the misleading sense of direction that's likely when the term ends next June could make the court a galvanizing campaign issue for Republicans, not Democrats.”
Source: SCOTUS Blog
Edward Lazarus at FindLaw examines how the lethal injection case will not only underscore the ideological differences between the justices, but their methods for interpreting the Constitution as well: “It is hard to imagine a case more perfectly suited to capture the jurisprudential dilemma that has consumed and divided our legal culture for the last thirty years—namely, the tension between interpreting our Constitution in a way that is responsive to the nation's history and experience, and making the interpretive process a free–for–all in which unelected and generally unaccountable judges impose on the Constitution their own personal political and moral beliefs ... The lethal injection case raises a classic example, for it will turn on an interpretation of one of the Constitution's less pellucid phrases—the prohibition on ‘cruel and unusual’ punishments. There is no self–evident benchmark for what is too cruel or too unusual. Rather, deciding what punishments are ‘cruel’ or ‘unusual’ seems to cry out for some sort of subjective judgment—a search for standards and benchmarks that will never be completely value–neutral.”
Source: FindLaw
Historical Perspective: A history of the Supreme Court, landmark decisions, and the changing number of justices
Each Supreme Court is named after its chief justice—a position one can reach only through presidential appointment. The current court is referred to as the Roberts Court, after Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. The Supreme Court Historical Society offers a detailed history of each court dating from its formation in 1789 to the Rehnquist Court that ended in 2005.
Source: The Supreme Court Historical Society
Since the Supreme Court first convened in 1790, its decisions have played an integral part in shaping American history. eJournal USA: Issues of Democracy summarizes some of the court’s most significant cases from 1803 to 1964.
Source: The State Department's eJournal USA: Issues of Democracy
Although the current Supreme Court has nine justices, the original Judiciary Act of 1789 set the number of justices at six. Decided by Congress, the number of justices has changed periodically since the court’s formation. Author Jean Edward Smith, writing for The New York Times, explores how Congress has used its power to alter the court in order to prevent justices from straying into the political arena.
Source: The New York Times
Reference Material: Glossary of legal terms, biographies of the justices, and what Americans do not know
From a fortiori to writ, the Supreme Court news site Oyez provides a concise glossary of legal terms.
Source: Oyez
The current Supreme Court consists of Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. and Associate Justices John Paul Stevens, Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, David H. Souter, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen G. Breyer, and Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. The Supreme Court Historical Society provides short biographies of each of the nine justices.
Source: The Supreme Court Historical Society
According to a recent survey by the Annenburg Public Policy Center, only 30 percent of Americans know that Supreme Court rulings are final and cannot be appealed. The survey also found that 55 percent of Americans do not know that when the court rules in a case by a vote of 5–4, the decision is still law and needs to be followed. Fourteen percent believe the ruling is sent to Congress for reconsideration.
Source: The Annenburg Public Policy Center
Related Topics: Key cases in the Supreme Court’s new term
National Public Radio interviews Mimi Wesson, professor at the University of Colorado School of Law, about the court’s lethal injection case—Baze v. Rees. Wesson tells NPR that the justices will have to address both factual and legal issues. The court will not only have to determine how probable it is that the widely used three-drug cocktail will cause the inmate severe pain before death, but also at what point the risk of such pain is high enough that the justices are willing to condemn the practice as “cruel and unusual punishment,” which is barred by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. Audio of the program is available on the NPR Web site.
Source: National Public Radio
The Wall Street Journal focuses on the court’s two upcoming cases involving the reach of executive power. The first case—Medellin v. Texas—will be argued on Oct. 10, and considers whether President Bush has the authority to order a state to comply with international law. The second case—Boumediene v. Bush—is slated for review this fall, and concerns whether Congress has the authority to deny Guantanamo Bay detainees the right to habeas corpus— the petition that asks a court to rule on the legality of their detention.
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Mother Jones, a San Francisco–based political magazine, delves further into the Boumediene v. Bush case, providing a short background and summaries of the arguments both sides are expected to make.
Source: Mother Jones
Robert M. Chesney, associate law professor at Wake Forest University School of Law, analyzes the legal impact of the Supreme Court’s potential actions in Boumediene v. Bush.
Source: Harvard International Law Journal
The Supreme Court will also decide a case that may have huge consequences for Merck in its pending Vioxx litigation, as well as for pharmaceutical companies at large. At issue in the case, known as Warner-Lambert v. Kent, is whether a number of state statutes meant to curb the ability of consumers to sue drug companies for personal injury are pre–empted by a 2001 Supreme Court ruling. The court’s ruling—which should come early next year—has the potential to affect personal injury suits against drug companies nationwide.
Source: Fortune's Legal Pad Blog
Another important business case on the Supreme Court’s docket concerns the liability of third parties in cases of corporate fraud. The court will decide whether a company that does business with a U.S. corporation that defrauds its investors—think Enron—can be held accountable for that fraud. Although the Securities and Exchange Commission has the power to sue third parties to recover investor losses, the court will decide if that same right should be extended to shareholders.
Source: Financial Times
Most Recent Beyond The Headlines
© 2012 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
