Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The role the Supreme Court plays in policymaking
Discuss the power of the american supreme court
The role the Supreme Court plays in policymaking
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The role the Supreme Court plays in policymaking
In his influential 1957 Journal of Public Law article, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker,” Robert Dahl argues for the Supreme Court's role as a policy arbiter, describing it as being pseudo-political, acting to contravene the political sphere and legislative maneuvering while itself remaining outside of political life. Even per the skeptical Dahl, the Court can be effective in shaping policy and thus be as effective a branch as the other two given certain circumstances. More inclusive evidence demonstrates the contrary; while the Court is able to judge a law or an act’s constitutionality, its powers to correct what it deems errors are nearly nonexistent. Gerald Rosenberg’s theoretical insight and methodological thoroughness brings Dahl, his methods, and his conclusions into dispute as he counters assertions of the Court’s efficacy in policymaking.
Despite its remarkable conclusions, Dahl's article lacks the comprehensive inquiries necessary for examining the Court's role as a policy arbiter and creator. The systemic influences of Court decisions are inadequately measured in the study, thanks in no small part to the limiting specifications that prevent a broad, incisive discourse on the topic. However, the Court's influence pervades both federal and state law in both word and in deed. To cover only one part and not the whole overestimates its agency. Firstly, he inadequately assesses the role of the Court's decisions in both non-legislative cases and in state laws; for example, he mentions “its famous school integration decisions,” (i.e., Brown v. Board of Education, Bolling v. Sharpe, and Griffin v. County School Board of Prince Edward County), but neglects Plessy v. Ferguson, t...
... middle of paper ...
...terested parties to donate vast sums to campaigns and, in so doing, minimize the impact of their opponents’ campaigning. Seen as giving an unfair advantage to the wealthy, these decisions undermine the legitimacy of choice in American democracy and thus threaten the democratic institutions that the Constitution created and that laws protect. If this be the case, if the Supreme Court’s rulings challenge the spirit of the Constitution, the other branches of government are mandated to challenge it. If the Court inadvertently decides poorly, its ineffectiveness may prove a boon.
Works Cited
Dahl, R. A. (2001). Decision-making in a democracy: the Supreme Court as a national policy-maker. (Honorary Reprint). Emory Law Journal, 50(2), 563–582.
Rosenberg, G. N. (2008). The hollow hope : can courts bring about social change? Chicago: Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
The court case of Marbury v. Madison (1803) is credited and widely believed to be the creator of the “unprecedented” concept of Judicial Review. John Marshall, the Supreme Court Justice at the time, is lionized as a pioneer of Constitutional justice, but, in the past, was never really recognized as so. What needs to be clarified is that nothing in history is truly unprecedented, and Marbury v. Madison’s modern glorification is merely a product of years of disagreements on the validity of judicial review, fueled by court cases like Eakin v. Raub; John Marshall was also never really recognized in the past as the creator of judicial review, as shown in the case of Dred Scott v. Sanford.
Hall, Kermit L, eds. The Oxford guide to United States Supreme Court decisions New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
In America’s time there have been many great men who have spent their lives creating this great country. Men such as George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson fit these roles. They are deemed America’s “founding fathers” and laid the support for the most powerful country in history. However, one more man deserves his name to be etched into this list. His name was John Marshall, who decided case after case during his role as Chief Justice that has left an everlasting mark on today’s judiciary, and even society itself. Through Cases such as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) he established the Judicial Branch as an independent power. One case in particular, named Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), displayed his intuitive ability to maintain a balance of power, suppress rising sectionalism, and unite the states under the Federal Government.
Ferguson was shaped by two key components of our system of government: precedent and federalism. Although the precedent, “separate but equal”, influenced the Supreme Court’s decision, this court case helped the formation and affirmation of the later established doctrine. Furthermore, this case required the assessment of federalism on a more complex level. The division of power between two governments was looked upon when the case was introduced with different laws put in place by different governments. In conclusion, two vital components, federalism and precedent, were used to constitute tradition and clarify the laws in place in the late 19th
Before the decision of Brown v. Board of Education, many people accepted school segregation and, in most of the southern states, required segregation. Schools during this time were supposed to uphold the “separate but equal” standard set during the 1896 case of Plessy v. Ferguson; however, most, if not all, of the “black” schools were not comparable to the “white” schools. The resources the “white” schools had available definitely exceed the resources given to “black” schools not only in quantity, but also in quality. Brown v. Board of Education was not the first case that assaulted the public school segregation in the south. The title of the case was shortened from Oliver Brown ET. Al. v. the Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. The official titled included reference to the other twelve cases that were started in the early 1950’s that came from South Carolina, Virginia, Delaware and the District of Columbia. The case carried Oliver Brown’s name because he was the only male parent fighting for integration. The case of Brown v. Board o...
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
federal courts: A content analysis based on agency theory. PhD diss., The George Washington University.
The Supreme Court is perhaps most well known for the Brown vs. Board of Education decision in 1954. By declaring that segregation in schools was unconstitutional, Kevern Verney says a ‘direct reversal of the Plessy … ruling’1 58 years earlier was affected. It was Plessy which gave southern states the authority to continue persecuting African-Americans for the next sixty years. The first positive aspect of Brown was was the actual integration of white and black students in schools. Unfortunately, this was not carried out to a suitable degree, with many local authorities feeling no obligation to change the status quo. The Supreme Court did issue a second ruling, the so called Brown 2, in 1955. This forwarded the idea that integration should proceed 'with all deliberate speed', but James T. Patterson tells us even by 1964 ‘only an estimated 1.2% of black children ... attended public schools with white children’2. This demonstrates that, although the Supreme Court was working for Civil Rights, it was still unable to force change. Rathbone agrees, saying the Supreme Court ‘did not do enough to ensure compliance’3. However, Patterson goes on to say that ‘the case did have some impact’4. He explains how the ruling, although often ignored, acted ‘relatively quickly in most of the boarder s...
Dahl conducted his study on the decision making of the Supreme Court and whether the Court exercised its power of judicial review to counter majority will and protect minority rights or if it used the power to ratify the further preferences of the dominant “national law making majority.” From the results of Dahl’s study he builds numerous arguments throughout his article, “Decision-Making in a Democracy: the Supreme Court as a National Policy-Maker”. In what follows, I will thoroughly point out and explain each of the arguments that Dahl constructs in his article.
The strategic model acknowledges that judges seek to achieve policy goals, but it also acknowledges that they are subject to certain restrictions in doing so. Since they cannot act accordingly to preference, they must act strategically to achieve their goals given by the restrictions. It argues that like politicians, justices make their decisions based off other’s decisions or make their decisions while trying to determine how another person will react from it. This decision style says justices would base their decisions on the influence of other justices.
Smith, Robert C. "Supreme Court." Encyclopedia of African-American Politics. New York: Facts On File, Inc., 2003. African-American History Online. Facts on File, Inc. Web. 20 Nov. 2011.
federal courts: A content analysis based on agency theory. PhD diss., The George Washington University.
Oral arguments influence the questions raised by Justices, which signal their concern about the external actors’ preferences in public policy, since not all this issues are presented in amicus briefs (Johnson 30). The purpose for this is for Justices to use discretion when making court decisions, in order to avoid affecting the public policy preference of the executive branch and Congress (Johnson 47). For Justices it is important to make court decisions that would not affect the future policy preference of all external
Robert N. Clinton, ‘Judges Must Make Law: A Realistic Appraisal of the Judicial Function in a Democratic Society’ [1981-1982] 67 Iowa L. Rev. 711 http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ilr67&div=38&g_sent=1&collection=journals accessed 12 February 2012
The American system of politics, based on Federalism, distributes power, roles, and responsibilities between the federal government and the state government. Although these two governments are separate, they are unified because of the United States Constitution, the foundation of the laws and the governmental system. Nonetheless, the unity of the two governments has not curtailed the exorbitant number of cases filed in the Supreme Court ranging from gun control to physician-assisted deaths. The Supreme Court final verdict sets a precedent for future cases. As a result, the Supreme Court has a momentous effect in allocating authority between the state and the federal government.