The Supreme Court: Then and Now

Chapter fourteen delves into the inner workings and responsibilities of the US Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, being one of the three branches of our government, is obviously vested with a large degree of power and influence over the discourse of American politics. The job of this body is to oversee the decisions made by the other branches and citizens and evaluate them through the lens of the Constitution. There are times when the Court will deem something unconstitutional, as it goes against the ideals and terms encumbered in the document. Other times, they will uphold a ruling or political decision made by other Americans because they deem it to be in line with what our Constitution says. However, the ruling of the Supreme Court comes down to interpretation. How the current justices view constitutionality is a factor of their ideals, political stances, and personal analysis of the document itself. The American culture and attitudes of the times that the justices rule during also certainly play a large role in the interpretation and rulings made. As these cultural attitudes change, interpretation may change.

This truth regarding the nature of the Supreme Court is evident in the changing of previous decisions. Plessy v. Ferguson was a landmark Supreme Court case that ruled in favor of segregation and the “separate but equal” status of whites and African Americans. This decision was made in 1896, a post-Civil War time in which tensions between black and white Americans were high and racism was very prevalent due to the fact that slavery had been abolished only a few years prior. These sentiments surely played a role in the choice made by the Supreme Court justices to uphold the constitutionality of segregation. A little more than half a century later, the Supreme Court made a ruling in the case of Brown v. The Board of Education that essentially overruled their Plessy v. Ferguson decision. Brown v. The Board of Education was the headlining case in a series of other cases that weakened the Plessy ruling because it declared separate but equal schooling for American students as unconstitutional. The fact that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of segregation at one point in our nation’s history, and then ruled in the opposite direction some years later delineates that the attitudes and culture of the United States and public opinion may have a direct effect on judicial discourse.

The different rulings in Plessy and Brown also show how the Supreme Court, like the other branches of government, respond to the public opinion. Public opinion sends signals to all elected and governmental officials that later frame our laws and political system, and this is no different in the case of the Supreme Court. How the Supreme Court interprets a case will have a basis in the public opinion and how the American people would view the constitutionality of a certain case. As the public sentiments change with time, as does the means in which this branch of our government interprets and operates.

5 Responses to "The Supreme Court: Then and Now"

Paige Jordan says:

April 23, 2018 at 12:31 pm

Carlin, thank you for your post. It is true that the decisions made by the Supreme Court are indeed a reflection of the attitudes and culture of the U.S. at each time a case is presented. Further, this is also a reflection that our democracy is working. For the beliefs and perceptions held by our public influence our judicial and legislative decisions. The example of Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. The Board of Education is one particular instance where the Court reconsiders an instance previously deemed constitutional. Throughout our history, several of these types of cases resurface, such as when determining how constitutional capital punishment was within Furman v. Georgia and later Gregg v. Georgia. The arbitrary nature of the process of the death penalty was once sufficient to declare the entire practice unconstitutional. Four years later, the Gregg v. Georgia decision deemed reform to the process constitutional, so long as the possibility for arbitrary behavior was limited. How the Constitution applies to current events is evident to be a re-occurring issue ever since it was created.
Gwynna Ryan says:

April 23, 2018 at 4:50 pm

Carlin,

Thank you for this post. I especially appreciate that you acknowledge that interpretations from the Supreme Court regarding the Constitution are subject to public opinion. This is not something I had really considered previously. Supreme Court justices were intended to always be unbiased in their interpretation. The Constitution either supported legislation or it didn’t. As you allude, however, Supreme Court decisions are directly a result of the time. Decisions on abortion or legalizing same-sex marriage could not have occurred earlier than they did because there would not have been the public support necessary to make any changes. Another interesting element of the Supreme Court and its decisions is that it was written over 200 years ago. The framers could not foresee every challenge that this country has faced and will continue to face. There is some question about the legitimacy of a document written so long ago while this country still had slavery and before women could vote and before the advent of modern technology.
Sophia Harrison says:

April 25, 2018 at 2:48 pm

Carlin,
Thank you for your post! I really like how you compared the two court rulings to changes in public opinion. I had never thought of Supreme Court rulings in that way, because I always thought it was based on legal framework that I could not wrap my head around. In regards to the courts reacting to public opinion, it will be really interesting to see what the court rules in Trump’s Muslim travel ban, considering the American population is fairly split on their beliefs. In November, 2016, a Quinnipiac poll found that 50% of respondents supported the policy and 44% opposed it, while the rest offered no opinion. In February, 2017, just after President Trump signed the executive order, the same polling group asked the same question. Only this time, the results were the exact opposite, with only 44% supporting the policy and 50% opposing it. When the majority public opinion isn’t clearly outlined, what do the courts do? If the courts rule in favor of the travel ban, is it just another civil rights case that we have to wait out? While there is increasing acceptance of homosexuality, these changes took decades. From 1970 to 1990, opinions barely changed at all. Although there have been changes since then, it has been incremental, changing a little each year. The Muslim ban court ruling will have to be largely based off of Constitutional powers embedded in the Executive branch, and there is very much a possibility of it being passed.
Alexander Morris says:

April 25, 2018 at 11:38 pm

Carlin,

Very interesting and unique post. Your analysis on the Supreme Court then and now is a backbone to our countries system. In terms of public opinion, the justice system is always supposed to be set up as an unbiased system in which its rulings our dependent upon the information stapled in our Constitution. Relating back to this point, the Constitution could be argued that it may be outdated to today’s events. Obviously, it was set up to be a framework of future decisions, but the rulings of the courts could be quite possibly just be the results our time period. Over time and in the future, it will be interesting to see whether or not the rules and obligations of the Supreme Court will change. Overall, great post and interesting topic you’ve risen.
Madeleine Stone says:

April 26, 2018 at 10:24 pm

Hey Carlin,

Thanks for a great post! I find your position on Supreme Court rulings being based on interpretation very captivating. It is evident that the current justices on the bench and their views will effect every ruling the Supreme Court decides on. The volatility of our American culture definitely helps shape these interpretations made on the rulings and how interpretations from previous rulings may change. Like you said, we have seen this prove itself true in our history with Plessy v. Ferguson. There are other cases that we can note how the changing of times effect the ruling interpretation such as Dred Scott v Sandford where citizenship was denied to African American slaves. Obviously after the civil war this ruling was no longer in effect anymore, but in 1857 the ruling was an interpretation based on the current political attitude of society during that intense time period. The fact is that different rulings of the Supreme Court show how the judicial branch of government can respond to public opinion and how it can actually help shape it as well.

Comments are closed.