The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court by Jeffrey Toobin The Supreme Court of the United States has played an integral role in the formation of law in the United States and continues to mold the legal structure of the country. Since the Supreme Court first convened on February 2, 1790, the Court has heard many quintessential landmark cases that have resulted in decisions that have greatly altered American legal structure and society. The Nine by Jeffrey Toobin chronicles the Supreme Court in the late 20th and early 21st Centuries under Chief Justice William Rehnquist and his successor, Chief Justice John Roberts. The book principally focuses on the little publicized happenings of the Supreme Court and its justices. The Nine …show more content…
The Federalist Society believed in weak central government and wanted to dismantle a strong central government on a constitutional basis. On March 10, 1992 Alfonso Lopez Jr., a twelfth grader, arrived at Edison High School in San Antonio, Texas with a .38 caliber pistol and five bullets with intent to sell these items to another student. The school, acting on a tip, had Lopez arrested under a Texas law that banned guns from being carried on school grounds. However, these charges were dropped after federal charges were brought under the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990. In United States v. Alfonso D. Lopez, Lopez was sentenced to six months in prison, which obstructed plans to join the Marines. This case was appealed until it reached the Supreme Court, at which point the constitutionality of the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 was defended by Solicitor General Drew Days III under the grounds that guns in schools affects interstate commerce, which falls under the jurisdiction of Congress. Despite a strong argument by Breyer on the constitutionality of these laws, the court ruled five to four to strike down the laws and overturn Lopez’s sentence. The conservative movement had seen a victory here, and looked for more victories pertaining to abortion and free expression of religion in schools. Evangelical Christians were major constituents of this movement and were active in the Federalist Society. This grassroots movement of Christians was dubbed the “moral majority,” as they believed strongly in pro-life values and free expression of religion. Jay Sekulow, a Jewish lawyer that had attended law school at Mercer University in Georgia was a frontrunner of the conservative cause. After reading the Book of Isaiah, he recognized that this scripture was about Jesus Christ and subsequently
As O’Brien analyzes this transition it can seem as though the modern Justices are just trying to put their work off on other people. However, this just merely scratches the surface of what’s actually going on. The growing importance of law clerks over time not only reflects the growth and expansion of the United States as a whole but also shifts in how our society functions. As a result, the Court has had to take on more responsibility, while also changing the way they approach their jobs. There is no doubt that the Supreme Court has become more institutionalized since its founding, due its growing caseload.
The idea the the Supreme court alone had the last word on the question of constitutionality. In this landmark case, Marshall inserted the keystone into the arch that supported the tremendous power of the Supreme Court in American life.” This textual evidence shows that John Marshall from the previous paragraph that he pushed the authority of the court which lead to now the promotion of judicial review. The judicial review was the idea that the Supreme Court had the last response on the questioning of constitutionality. The judicial review was a long term ramification because it is still used still today to review the a law that is brought before it through a
The articles written by Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer both contribute valid insight on how the Constitution should be interpreted. They, however, end up taking conflicting views on whether to adopt what is known as a living constitution or to bind the judiciary by the original meaning of the document. Throughout their works, the authors mention the importance of objectivity, judicial restraint and the historical context in which the Constitution was written under and whether or not it should apply to the United States today. Scalia argues in favor of the originalist approach, stating that he supports neither a strict nor a loose interpretation of the Constitution, but rather, a reasonable interpretation. Breyer sides with the cosequentialist ideals, claiming that active participation in collective power is paramount when it comes to evaluating the Constitution's place in American law.
In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton lays out his vision for the Supreme Court of the United States. In this essay, Hamilton explains that the court should function as a “bulwark against majoritarian excesses,” (O’Brien 181) to protect the rights of the minority, from the tyranny of the majority. Hamilton makes the assurance that the court will use separation of powers as a “check” on Congress in order to protect against popular will (O’Brien 22). To accomplish this, the court had to function as an independent body to “safeguard” against “occasional ill humors in the society,” (O’Brien 349) in the event that popular will was harmful to the minority. Conversely, in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case, Chief Justice John Marshall
Comparison Between Chief Justices Earl Warren and William Rehnquist Jacob Smith Park University, CJ221 Criminal Procedure When looking at Chief Justice Earl Warren and Chief Justice William Rehnquist, you begin to notice a difference in their idealistic approaches to the interpretation of the law. Earl Warren was very liberal in his judgments, standing on principle that individual rights needed to be protected. He saw that the need for the individual, specifically individuals of different race and ethnic origins deserved the same constitutional rights as everyone else. Chief Justice William Rehnquist on the other hand, was much more conservative and believed that some individual rights must be sacrificed in order to maintain order within
In the case of Marbury v. Madison Chief Justice John Marshall utilized his power in a legal but cunning way to alter the balance of power between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of government. Justice Marshall used his opinion in the courts to manipulate the Constitution, creating what we know as judicial review. Because the Constitution does not explicitly state what judicial review is Justice Marshall is known for creating it. In an effort to resolve the case, Justice Marshall answered three questions supported by strong arguments. The wide acceptance of his doctrine created judicial review-- the Supreme Court’s ability to uphold or deny the constitutionality of congressional or executive actions.
In both the McCulloch v. Maryland and Gibbons v. Ogden cases, John Marshall asserted the power of judicial review, and legitimatized the Supreme Court within the national government. The Marshall Court, over the span of thirty years, managed to influence the life of every American by aiding in the development of the judicial branch and establishing a boundary between the state and national government. John Marshall’s Supreme Court cases shaped how the government is organized today. He strongly believed in Federalism, and that the national government should be sovereign, rather than the states. The Supreme Court under John
The issue in this case was whether school-sponsored nondenominational prayer in public schools violates the Establishment clause of the first amendment (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This case dealt with a New York state law that had required public schools to open each day with the Pledge of Allegiance and a nondenominational prayer in which the students recognized their dependence upon God (Facts and Case Summary - Engel v. Vitale, n.d.). This law had also allowed students to absent themselves from this activity if they found that it was objectionable. There was a parent that sued the school on behalf of their child. Their argument was that the law violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, as made applicable
The United States of America was formed on the basis of freedom from tyranny, which is crucial to understand as today’s historians take documents out of context to fit their agenda. One must go back to the original intent and not abuse the firm foundation of the United States. The United States rely on two documents to stand against tyranny and hope for a new life: The Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the United States. Their one document which stands to prevent from tyranny, Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptist. Though Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptist was written to prevent tyranny, it has been taken out of context and impacts the Supreme Court of the United States today.
Identification and Evaluation of Sources This investigation will explore the question “how did non-minorities in the United States affect the Civil Rights Movement?” The reactions and influences of non-minorities are not often talked about when learning about the Civil Rights Movement. Because of this, this investigation will focus on the impact this movement had on white people and how they affected it as well. The first source that will be evaluated in depth is “Supreme Court Drama: Cases That Changed America” by Daniel E. Brannen Jr., Richard Clay Hanes, and Rebecca Valentine, published in 2011.
John Marshall altered the Court’s position within the constitutional system and engaged a dynamic battle to sustain the federal authority over the interstate business and in dealings between the states and the federal government. This he did during the thirty-four years he was the chief justice and to date is a legacy in the Court’s history. Marbury v. Madison (1803) marked the commencing of Marshall’s record of achievement in which he justified the Court’s supremacy of judicial review - the rule to assess the constitutionality of state laws and other actions of the government - and put down the foundations of national constitutional jurisprudence. In Fletcher v. Peck (1810), Marshall alleged that a land grant was a contract that a government
Jackson wrote the majority opinion, the Supreme Court held that unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment. Under the First Amendment, the government cannot enforce laws on an individual’s will regarding of religious liberty. As long as the actions do not present a clear and present danger. The school district had clearly violated the student rights by forcing the student to salute the flag and pledge of allegiances. Jackson reasoned that by forcing the student to salute the flag it was a sign of communicated an expression of set idea.
Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.
The Leonore Annenberg Institute for Civics video titled “Key Constitutional Concepts” explores the history of the creation of the United States Constitution in addition to key concepts crucial to the document. Two central themes explored in the video include the protection of personal rights and importance of checks and balances. The video strives to explain these concepts through Supreme Court cases Gideon v. Wainwright and Youngstown v. Sawyer. To begin, the video retraces the steps leading up to the Constitutional Convention in Virginia in 1787. It opens by explaining the conflict that led to the Revolutionary War and the fragility of the new nation.
Moreover, this led to a notable disruption in America at the time and led to many affronted Americans. “... more difficult Establishment Clause cases involve government assistance or approval of religion...” (Brannen) This quote is saying that, just like other cases that involve the Establishment Clause, the public school’s composed prayer was seen as a violation of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment due to the government's assistance in all public schools. This quote also reinforces that the court case influenced America by changing how much the church, and religion, were influenced in public schools.