To What Extent Has the Roberts Court Witnessed a Revival of Conservative Activism?

Justices Anthony Kennedy, John Roberts, Clarence Thomas, Stephen Breyer, and Samuel Alito made up the majority of the court with the opinion founded upon the assertion that DNA testing is a comparable method of identification to fingerprinting and photographing arrestees. Justice Anthony Kennedy, wrote the opinion of the court, “sits at the court’s ideological center and joins the court’s four-member liberal wing about a third of the time when it divides along partisan lines.” As a Republican, this makes him stand out as he actively resisted the kind of political polarization faced by the court. Kennedy’s swing vote is important in the consideration of our formal and informal actors in the courts decision as he, and the other justices, are considered the formal actors.

The role of the Judicial Branch of the United States has been the most dynamic throughout the Nation’s history. By adopting the power of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, the Supreme Court established its position as being arguably the most powerful branch of Federal Government. However, this also made the Judiciary’s role the most controversial. Should the Court be required to interpret the constitution strictly through the language it contains? Does the Court have the right to overturn morals legislation? Through analyzing court cases like Lawrence v. Texas, one can gain insight on the role of the Supreme Court and how it fits within the confines of the United States Government.

Against this factors are; Chief Justice John Roberts emphasize on the SSM as being a democratic disrespect, judicial putsch by associate justice Antonin, inextricably linked by justice Samuel Alito and many other factors. Thus, it is essential to consider the actual changes in the opinion count resulting from a decision and the political backlash to adequately determine the relationship between the Supreme Court’s decision and the public

The Judicial Branch has opened up opportunities for the country of the United States of America in many ways. The Judicial Branch has found new ways to affect our society. They are meant to interpret the laws for our country. They do this to ensure our country is being protected by the

In Supreme Conflict, Jan Crawford Greenburg provides insightful analysis and assessment of the politics surrounding the Supreme Court appointment process of Justices during the Rehnquist Court. Despite having seven conservative nominees the Rehnquist Court was deeply disappointing to those conservatives hoping to reverse decades of progressive rulings on key social issues. Throughout the book Greenburg describes both positive and negative appointments and nominations such as Anthony Kennedy Clarence Thomas, and David Souter. Greenburg also includes some background on the impact the Warren and Berger Courts had on the Rehnquist and later Roberts Courts.

a. Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy that calls for the court to play an active role in determining national policies and to apply the Constitution to the social and political questions of their present day.

One of Nixon's campaign pledges was to appoint conservative judges to the Supreme Court to counter the perceived liberalism of the Warren Court. Supporters of this pledge claimed that the Warren Court's permissive rulings were eroding the moral base of the country and that their coddling of criminals had led to high crime rates and serious civil disturbances. Another complaint against the Warren Court was that it engaged in "judicial activism," meaning the intent of the court's decisions went beyond settling disputes between particular parties and into the arena of law-making. Racial desegregation and the reapportionment of voting districts are examples of areas in which the court's mandates affected not just the parties engaged in the suit, but literally every American.

Associate Justice Antonin Scalia was sworn into the Supreme Court on September 26, 1986 and was nominated by President Ronald Reagan. He took the place of Associate Justice William H. Renquist when Renquist was sworn in as Chief Justice. Justice Antonin Scalias' political affiliation is Republican. Justice Antonin started his career as a commercial lawyer for a brief period. He then taught Law at The University of Virginia. After about 4 years of teaching he went into government service starting under President Nixon and then President Ford. During President Carters reign, Justice Antonin left government service to go back to teaching law. He went back into government service under President Reagans administration and was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington D.C. Justice Antonin Scalia attended Georgetown University and graduated as the Valedictorian of his class. He then went on to attend and graduate from Harvard Law School. He is married and had nine children.

B) For the first time since 1971, the Supreme Court is likely going to be composed of a majority of liberal justices due to the vacancy caused by the resignation of Antonin Scalia. To fill this vacancy, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland, whose political leanings fall between moderate and liberal, but this nomination has not been approved by Congress due to Senate Republicans believing that the incoming president should fill this vacancy. In addition to Scalia’s vacancy, there are a number of potential vacancies in the upcoming years as three current justices are seventy-eight years of age or older; if these vacancies all occur while a Democrat, such as Hillary Clinton, serves as president, it is likely that all three would be filled by liberal justices, making the court split six to three in favor of liberals. This liberal Supreme Court could make many changes related to prison conditions, the death penalty, campaign financing, and abortion. First, the court would potentially eliminate the use of extended periods of solitary confinement on the grounds that this is in conflict with the Eighth Amendment. Likewise, the court would possibly get rid of the death penalty on the basis that it also violates the Eighth Amendment. Additionally, the court could perhaps work to limit the influence of wealthy

How do I feel about the Supreme Court being more conservative now that Gorsuch is sworn in? Well, I am tremendously pleased! In our Supreme Court, we now have five conservatives and four liberals, majority being the conservatives. With more conservatives we should have less taxes, less government control, and essentially, a return to our original constitution. Liberals think that Americans are not clever enough to know what's good for them, they believe that they should control everything, but now that there are more conservatives, we, the people, have more power.

For example, in the 1930s, President Franklin D. Roosevelt sought to expand the court and create a majority of Democrats, who, if appointed, would fervently support his New Deal program. Professor Gregory G. Caldeira (Ph.D.), in the Department of Political Science at The Ohio State University, argues in his article, Public Opinion and The U.S. Supreme Court: FDR’s Court-Packing Plan, that in this incident, there was indeed an “intimate connection between the actions of the justices and support for the Supreme Court…during which Franklin D. Roosevelt sought legislation to permit him to pack the high bench with friendly personnel” (Caldeira, 1987, p. 1139). Referring to the Gallup Polls of 1937, which showed that public support for the court substantially decreased in four months, he believes that justices tend to build up their relationship with parties in brief periods before appointment. He sardonically states that this phenomenon has become a “series of well-timed decisions” (Caldeira, 1987, p. 1141). Even though Congress eventually rejected Roosevelt’s “Court Packing” plan, Caldeira’s view demonstrates the drastic influence of the executive branch, and more broadly, party politics, on the high court. This particular case portrays that party politics are continuing to undermine the Constitution

While the Framers’ intent behind life appointments is to protect the Justices from political influences, it is assumed that when a President appoints a Supreme Court Justice that he will choose one with an agenda similar to his own. The Supreme Court should be an archetype of where the country is politically at a given time. However, with the irregularity of when Justices need to be replaced, the political composition of the court is affected. Jimmy Carter, for example, appointed zero Justices, while Eisenhower appointed five. This is extremely concerning because it has led to the political stacking of the court, as seen when there was a period of twenty six years when no Democratic Justice was appointed between Thurgood Marshall and Ruth Bade Ginsburg. Justices have even been known to time their retirement to coincide with the political party affiliation of the sitting President so as not to tilt the balance of the court. This could lead to the political stacking of the court, which again, goes against the Framers’ original intentions of having an unpartisan

When Earl Warren came to Washington, D.C. to assume the role of Chief Justice, he brought with him an awe of the Supreme Court. That was one reason that in his first few months, he played a passive role on the Court as he held back hoping to get a better sense of how the Court operated and what his role would be (White, 1982). However, he would not be allowed to continue to take that inactive stance for very long. By December, 1953, five cases came along that were lumped together and were thereafter known as Brown v. Board of Education. It was this case that established Earl Warren’s role on Supreme

intervened in many foreign affairs during the 50s, 60s, 70s, the government also passed many laws for the betterment of the society. The most important case in the 1950s was Brown V. The Board of Education. As a result of this case, Plessy V. Ferguson was deemed unconstitutional. The African American equality movement was gaining steam in the 50s and then the 60s, thus Congress passed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. As a result of African Americans taking a step toward equality, the feminist movement was revived during the 1960s.

Judicial Activism- When judges deny legislators or the executive the power to do something unconstitutional.