The Supreme Court Documentary Movie Paper 2 Kaitlyn Toda POLI 1H: Political Science Honors Professor Sierra Powell June 6th, 2024. Being able to see an inside look at the Supreme Court and the people operating it was informative. The documentary, watched in class, explores not just the cases heard inside the Supreme Court, but also explores architecture, history, and current action it is taking to decide on new laws. Considering most if not all current laws are formed by a Supreme Court case hearing decision, this documentary's relevance is heightened, despite its age regarding release date. Many of the court cases learned about in class were brought up in the documentary. One of the interviewees stated that the courtroom has a history …show more content…
For a case to be decided to not be heard would mean over half of the Supreme Court chose not to hear it. It is surprising that the Supreme Court has time to hear and make a decision for each of the cases it chooses to hear, considering the fact odds are stacked against throwing out a case. An interesting concept brought up by one of the men interviewed was that one thing I found surprising was that in the documentary it seemed as though every one of the judges appointed and working in the Supreme Court are friendly and amicable with each other. They are all very fond of each other and seem to get along very well. I assumed that because the Supreme Court deals with such serious topic matters, there would be high tensions, especially between the judges themselves. However, they all seem to be friends. The mutual respect all the justices have for each other is a comforting notion because the Supreme Court is a collaborative effort (they must all agree in order to move forward). Women have been in the Supreme Court for a shorter period of time than men have, and there are fewer of them. While it seems as though noticing something like that is common sense, it is still interesting to ponder. The women in the Supreme Court wear the same robes as the men, and …show more content…
The changes we have seen in the Supreme Court since 2010 have been palpable seeing as this documentary came out almost 15 years prior to today. One of the main changes that I picked up on is the change in certain people. Ruth Bater Ginsburg is one of the most recognizable members of the Supreme Court. She passed away in 2020, but in the 2010 documentary she was interviewed as an active member of the Supreme Court. Other Supreme Court justices that have been appointed after the documentary came out include Brent Kavananugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson. There are many different changes that have been implemented within the Supreme Court, but through it all, it has remained a cornerstone for policy and law making. A big change in the Supreme Court documentary that I immediately picked up on was the lack of media coverage. Social media did not exist in 2010, at least if it did, not to the scale it is today. Justices in 2010 did not have to worry as much about what they say and faced less scrutiny two decades ago because there were less people watching their every move. This is the case for everyone in the public eye, whether it be pop stars or political
“The Nine: Inside the Secret World of the Supreme Court is a book written by Jeffrey Toobin. Jeffrey Toobin is a staff writer for the New Yorker, as well as, a CNN senior legal analyst. “The Nine” starts in the Reagan and ends in 2007. Toobin discusses all the major cases that the Supreme Court made a ruling on during that time period. He also talks about each of the Justices, their personalities and how they came to make the decisions they did. One of the things that I found most interesting about the book was that Toobin described how the Justices became Justices. Why the President, at the time, nominated them and who were the runners up for the position.
Brannen Jr., Daniel E., Richard Clay Hare and Rebeca E. Valentine, Supreme Court Drama: Cases that Changed America. 2 ed. Detroit: V-X-L, 2011, Print,
As one of the seven jury deliberations documented and recorded in the ABC News television series In the Jury Room the discussions of the jurors were able to be seen throughout the United States. A transcript was also created by ABC News for the public as well. The emotions and interactions of the jurors were now capable of being portrayed to anyone interested in the interworkings of jury deliberations. The first task,...
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
armbands was a silent form of expression and that students do not have to give
Columbia Law Review, 104, 1-20. doi:10.2307/4099343. Reynolds, S. (2009). The 'Standard'. An interview with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
People have always been concerned about our judicial system making massive decisions in an undemocratic manner and while there are parts of our nation’s history (Jost). There have been decisions that were dreadful for our nation, Dred Scott v. Sandford; but there are decisions that everyone can agree with in retrospect, Brown v. Board of Education. Also, there are decisions that still divide us as a nation, Bush v. Gore and Roe V. Wade. There are a lot of issues that come from our current judicial system; however, I understand that the problems that come from it are not going to come from any quick fix, and we may have to live with some of them. Looking at the history of the judicial branch of the United States Government, I believe it needs to be limited in its judicial review power, but have certain exceptions where necessary in some cases.
In 1787 Article three of the constitution created the Supreme Court, but not until 1789 was it configured. The way it was originally set up was with one Chief Justice and five associate judges, with all six members being appointed for life. This court serves as the “supreme law of the land”, it has the power to determine if state or federal laws are in conflict with how the Court interprets the constitution.
Throughout history there have always been issues concerning judicial courts and proceedings: issues that include everything from the new democracy of Athens, Greece, to the controversial verdict in the Casey Anthony trial as well as the Trayvon Martin trial. One of the more recent and ever changing issues revolves around cameras being allowed and used inside courtrooms. It was stated in the Handbook of Court Administration and Management by Stephen W. Hays and Cole Blease Graham, Jr. that “the question of whether or not to allow cameras in American courtrooms has been debated for nearly fifty years by scholars, media representatives, concerned citizens, and others involved in the criminal justice system.” The negatives that can be attached to the presence of cameras inside a courtroom are just as present, if not more present, than the positives that go hand-in-hand with the presence of cameras.
The Supreme Court, which sees almost 150 petitions per week, called cert petitions, must carefully select the cases that they want to spend their time and effort on (Savage 981). If they didn’t select them carefully, the nine justices would quickly be overrun, so they have put in place a program to weed through the court cases to pick out the small number they will discuss. There are a few criteria that are used to judge whether or not a case will be tried. The first is whether or not the lower courts decided the case based on another one of the Supreme Court’s decisions for they will investigate these in order to withhold or draw back their conclusion that they made in their court case. Another is the case’s party alignment: sometimes the justices will pick cases that will align with their party beliefs, like trying to get a death row inmate off of his death sentence. They also make claims about the “life” of the case- the Supreme Court only hears “live” cases- they do not try to go back in time and re-mark a case that has long since been decided (Savage 981). Lastly, they like to take cases where the lower courts did not decide with one another -these cases can have t o do with interpretations of the law that have been left up to the lower courts and should be specifically defined by the Supreme Court (Savage 982).
The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican government, he and his fellow justices sought to perpetuate their Federalist principles in the United States’ court system. In one of the most memorable court cases of all time--the case of Marbury v. Madison-- Marshall established the idea of judicial review and strengthened the power of the judicial branch in the government. Abiding by his Federalist ideals, Marshall decided cases that would explicitly limit the power of the state government and broaden the strengths of the national government. Lastly, the Marshall Court was infamous for determining the results of cases that dealt with the interpretation of the Constitution and the importance of contracts in American society. The Marshall Court, over the span of a mere three decades, managed to influence the life of every American citizen even to this day by impacting the development of the judicial branch, establishing a boundary between the state and national government, and making declarations on the sanctity of contracts ("The Marshall Court"...
The US Supreme Court was created in Article III of the Constitution and has the ultimate authority on the interpretation of constitutional law and is therefore deemed the highest court in the nation (USSC). The Supreme Court consists of a chief justice and eight associate justices who review cases from lower courts throughout the nation and rule on the constitutionality of the issues (Urofsky, 2001). The Supreme Court plays a large role in the American legal system because its rulings become law, affecting subsequent cases throughout the nation. During the late fifties and sixties, a time known as the Warren Court, the Supreme Court handed down multiple rulings that were controversial and especially impactful in the area of criminal investigations.
Before the jury stands the defendant. There is overwhelming evidence in the favor of the prosecution. The verdict comes back from the jury, not guilty. Why? The defendant is a woman. In our era of equal rights and civil liberties women have made great strides in their advancement and role in society, yet it seems that gender segregates when it comes to crime. There have been countless cases where women and men have been tried for the same crime, yet when it comes to verdict and sentencing, the results don’t necessarily match. If one commits a crime one should be punished accordingly regardless of gender. In our society we seem to have two separate rules for our criminals, one for men and one for women. The key issue is are men and women treated equally by the criminal justice system. Another issue in gender biased sentencing is in its is its severity. Are women sentenced heavier for certain crimes then men.
Some people say that by watching the court system in action, what once was very unknown and unfamiliar, has now become familiar and useful in helping people become more knowledgeable of what happens inside courtrooms. Most people have not been in a courtrooms and only have the perspective that T.V. gives to them. Now they are able to see what really goes on and now can better understand and relate.
The courtroom is a place where cases are heard and deliberated as evidence is produced to prove whether the accused person is innocent or guilty. Different courtroom varies depending on the hierarchy and the type of cases, they deliberate upon in the courtroom. In the United States, the courts are closely interlinked through a hierarchical system at either the state or the federal level. Therefore, the court must have jurisdiction before it takes upon a case, deliberate, and come up with a judgment on it. The criminal case is different from the civil cases, especially when it comes to the court layout. In this essay, I will explain how I experienced a courtroom visit and the important issues are learnt from the visit.