Supreme Court Case Study

Each judge has a different way of ruling court decisions, and the Presidents’ appointment of the Supreme Court judge plays a key role in how decisions are made. Judges either side on a strict construction or judicial activism. Strict construction is the view that the United States Constitution should be interpreted on a narrow view, meaning that the people will only judge based on what the constitution clearly states. Hugo Black, Democrat, was an influential strict constructionist, when he argued that you could only rule based on what the Construction say verbatim. Although Franklin Roosevelt appointed him, he did not follow Roosevelt New Deal plans. This was apparent in Griswold v. Connecticut, when he ruled that there was no right to privacy. Richard Nixon also believed in strict construction, and

This means that politicians can interpret the Constitution as they see fit. The biggest case in which judicial activism is implemented is Marbury v. Madison, judged by John Marshall. This case brought an expansion to judiciary power because of the new Judicial Review. Judicial Review allows legislation to be declared unconstitutional by the judiciary. These two types of Constitutional interpretations lead to vastly different forms of government.

1. a) Congress is able to change the number of judges in the judiciary. This limits the president’s power because he has a limited number of judges that he can appoint, and if he has more judges on his side, more of his programs are more likely to be passed. Congress can also revise legislation declared unconstitutional, and form constitutional amendments.

b) The Executive branch holds checks on the Judiciary branch by appointing judges to federal courts. This helps (but doesn’t guarantee) that the President’s ideology will be represented throughout these courts. The most important of these judges is the US Supreme Chief Justice, currently John