The US Supreme Court and Civil Rights

The United States Supreme Court occupies a central place in the American political system, shaping the meaning of the Constitution and influencing public policy, especially in the realm of civil rights. This section provides an overview for Politics students, covering the Court’s constitutional foundations, appointment process, impact on policy, and the continuing debates around its role and effectiveness in protecting civil liberties and advancing racial equality.

The Nature and Role of the Supreme Court

Constitutional Basis

The Supreme Court is established by Article III of the US Constitution as the highest court in the federal judiciary. It has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal and state court cases involving federal law, as well as original jurisdiction in certain cases. The Constitution, however, provides only a broad outline, leaving Congress to determine the Court’s size and structure.

Judicial Independence

Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Supreme Court’s legitimacy. Justices hold their positions during “good behaviour,” effectively granting life tenure, and their salaries cannot be reduced while in office. These provisions are designed to insulate justices from political pressure and ensure impartiality in interpreting the law.

The Process of Judicial Review

Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to declare acts of Congress, the executive, or states unconstitutional. This principle, not explicitly stated in the Constitution, was established in Marbury v Madison (1803), where the Court asserted its authority to review and nullify government actions that conflict with the Constitution. This was further reinforced in Fletcher v Peck (1810), marking the first time the Court struck down a state law as unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court Appointment Process

Steps in the Appointment Process

Supreme Court justices are nominated by the President and must be confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. The process typically involves:

• Presidential nomination
• Senate Judiciary Committee hearings (including questioning of the nominee and testimony from witnesses)
• Committee vote and recommendation
• Full Senate debate and confirmation vote

Strengths and Weaknesses

The appointment process is praised for its checks and balances, ensuring both executive initiative and legislative oversight. However, it is also criticised for increasing politicisation, lengthy delays, and the influence of ideological and interest group pressures.

Influencing Factors

Presidents may consider a nominee’s judicial philosophy, professional qualifications, demographic factors (such as gender and ethnicity), and the current ideological balance of the Court. The process is shaped by the political context, party control of the Senate, public opinion, and lobbying by interest groups.

The Supreme Court and Public Policy

Influence on Policy

The Supreme Court plays a vital role in shaping US public policy by interpreting the Constitution and federal law. Its rulings can uphold or overturn legislation, direct government action, and set national precedents.

Key Cases (post-2005)

• Obergefell v Hodges (2015): Legalised same-sex marriage nationwide.
• Shelby County v Holder (2013): Weakened the Voting Rights Act of 1965, affecting federal oversight of state voting laws.
• Citizens United v FEC (2010): Expanded corporate and union spending in elections.
• Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022): Overturned Roe v Wade, removing the federal constitutional right to abortion.

Judicial Activism vs Judicial Restraint

Judicial activism refers to the Court’s willingness to overturn laws and precedents, often to advance social change or protect rights. Judicial restraint emphasises deference to elected branches and existing laws. The balance between activism and restraint is a major source of debate, especially in politically charged cases.

Protection of Civil Liberties and Rights

Constitutional Protections

Civil liberties and rights are primarily protected by the Constitution, especially the Bill of Rights (the first ten amendments) and subsequent amendments, including:

• First Amendment: Freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition
• Fourth Amendment: Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures
• Fourteenth Amendment: Equal protection and due process under the law
• Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments: Voting rights regardless of race and gender

Supreme Court Rulings

The Supreme Court has interpreted these rights in landmark cases such as Brown v Board of Education (1954), which ended racial segregation in schools, and Miranda v Arizona (1966), which established rights for those in police custody. In recent years, the Court’s rulings on issues like LGBTQ+ rights, affirmative action, and voting rights have significantly influenced the scope and meaning of civil liberties in the US.

Race and Rights in Contemporary US Politics

Methods and Effectiveness of Racial Rights Campaigns

Racial rights campaigns employ a range of tactics, including litigation, lobbying, grassroots organising, and public demonstrations. Organisations such as the NAACP, Black Lives Matter, and the ACLU have played key roles in advancing racial equality.

Impact on Voting Rights, Affirmative Action, and Representation

Supreme Court decisions and legislation have shaped the landscape of voting rights (notably the weakening of the Voting Rights Act in Shelby County v Holder), affirmative action (e.g., Fisher v University of Texas, 2016), and political representation. The effectiveness of these campaigns is debated, with gains in representation and policy often countered by legal and political setbacks.

Interpretations and Debates

Political vs Judicial Nature of the Court

There is ongoing debate about whether the Supreme Court acts as a neutral arbiter of law or as a political institution influenced by ideology and public opinion. Critics argue that recent confirmation battles and decisions reflect increasing politicisation.

Living Constitution vs Originalism

Living Constitution advocates interpret the Constitution as a dynamic document that must adapt to modern circumstances. Originalists argue that constitutional meaning is fixed and should be interpreted as understood at the time of adoption. These interpretative differences shape decisions on civil rights and liberties.

Effectiveness of Rights Protection and Checks and Balances

The US system of checks and balances allows the Court to limit the powers of Congress and the President, but also subjects it to constraints (e.g., constitutional amendments, jurisdiction stripping, appointment of new justices). Debates persist over whether the Court adequately protects rights or oversteps its role.

Successes and Failures of Equality Measures

Affirmative action and immigration reform are contentious areas. While affirmative action has increased diversity in education and employment, its future is uncertain due to recent Court decisions. Immigration reform remains stalled, with the Court weighing in on issues like DACA and executive authority.

Key Terminology

Judicial Review: The power of courts to assess the constitutionality of legislative and executive acts.

Judicial Activism: A judicial philosophy favouring active intervention by courts in public policy.

Judicial Restraint: A philosophy advocating minimal interference by courts in the workings of the other branches.

Originalism: Interpreting the Constitution according to its original meaning at the time it was enacted.

Living Constitution: The idea that the Constitution’s interpretation should evolve with societal changes.

Affirmative Action: Policies that support members of disadvantaged groups, especially in education and employment.

Civil Liberties: Basic freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution, such as speech and religion.

Civil Rights: The right to equal treatment and protection under the law, particularly regarding race, gender, and other characteristics.

Checks and Balances: The system by which each branch of government limits the powers of the others to prevent abuse.

Bill of Rights: The first ten amendments to the US Constitution, guaranteeing key freedoms and protections.

Summary

The US Supreme Court is a pivotal institution in the American political landscape, with profound influence over civil rights and public policy. Through its constitutional basis, independent appointment process, and power of judicial review, it shapes the interpretation and application of fundamental rights. While it has played a crucial role in advancing equality and liberty, debates continue over its politicisation, interpretative philosophies, and effectiveness in protecting rights. Understanding these dynamics is essential for analysing contemporary US politics and the ongoing struggle for civil rights.