Content provided by Justin Thompson
The Supreme Court has become one of the most powerful branches in our government as of late, but did you know that was not always the case?
The court was established by the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789, passed by Congress and signed by President George Washington. It created a court of six judges who served on the court until death or retirement. The Supreme Court was a joke up until a pivotal court case that established the foundation of constitutional law. Marbury V. Madison (1803) not only declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, but also established judicial review. The Supreme Court was then comfortable with its purpose and footing in society.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt by the late 1930s, wanted to impose restriction on the court, primarily to receive favorable ratings with his New Deal Programs. He pushed the Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. The bill allowed the President to appoint six additional judges to the court who were older than 70 years,6 months and had served 10 years or more.
The court enjoys jurisdiction over all laws within the United States, is the court of last resort and determines what flies and does not fly. The Supreme Court has come under quite a bit of scrutiny as of late, many believe that the court has too much power for unelected judges, with some proposing in expanding the court to fifteen justices, imposing limits on the court, ethical standards for justices to abide by, and more transparency for the general public.
In 2014, President Obama, knowing Justice Ruth Badar Ginsburg was experiencing health issues, took her out to dinner and tried to informally get her to resign. This was done to make sure the seat stayed liberal. President Donald Trump jumped on the chance to create a 6-3 majority on the court with the death of Ruth Badar Ginsburg and pushed the nomination of Amy Comey Barret before 2020 election.
Which brings us to the issue at hand—does the Supreme Court yield too much power in
our society? The easy answer, yes. The Chief Justice of the United States presides over
Presidential impeachment trials, which Chief Justice Roberts in his capacity oversaw during the Trump years.
The court has broken traditions and norms. Many judicial picks pledge not to violate court precedents and standing law. The repeal of Roe V Wade sent shockwaves across the United States. The court is currently hearing matters of life and death from many walks of life that include matters of affirmative action, student loan forgiveness, LGBTQ+ issues,and religious liberties.
The White House was so concerned about the court reversing course on same-sex marriage that congress passed landmark legislation to ensure federal protections for same-sex and interracial couples.
The Biden Administration stated that “everyone should have the right to marriage without government interference and the bill secures the federal protections that come with marriage.’ The most troubling is a surge of voting rights and gerrymandering cases that challenge the integrity of our elections. Just recently, the court has unfrozen a case stemming from Louisiana suggesting that the state will have to redraw the boundary lines to create a second mostly Black congressional district. This has not been a new issue as the state has been filing petitions and battling courts for the past ten years. In Alabama, the court stated that the Republican led legislature drew congressional that discriminated and limited the power of Black voters.
We return to the question, does the court hold to much power for an unelected branch of government? The answer is yes. What we should be asking ourselves is how do we curb the decisions of the court? May we establish a code of conduct that the court abides by, since it has none? Many suggest we term limit the court to only ten years on the court. Some suggest direct elections by the voters. The truth is the court has become weaponized by the right, the culture wars that plague our nation, and a nomination process that needs to be reformed at the Senate end.
The question fundamentally becomes who is checking the nation’s highest court?
Editor’s note: The above column has been edited for formatting and clarity only. All research work, and all opinions stated belong to the author of the piece.
