6. The Court and the other branches

Is the phrase separation of powers misleading? “The Court and the other branches” looks at the Court in relation to the president and Congress. A more accurate description of the relationship between the branches might be “dynamic interaction” with tensions arising between them. Sometimes these tensions cause limited disagreements. Some developments are more ominous, such as Congress’s attempts to limit the Supreme Court’s power or the power of federal courts in general. This ingrained and constitutionally based struggle about law-making authority is expressed in a cycle of interaction and reaction that shows no sign of ending and may be hard-wired into the system.

4. The chief justice

The chief justice is not mentioned in the judicial article of the Constitution (Article III), but “The chief justice” demonstrates how the role has grown in importance over time. It is a multifaceted role, like that of a chief executive of a company. A traditional legal background is not necessarily the best preparation. Some chief justices believed that casting one of the nine votes in a case is still one of their most useful functions. It was a chief justice, William Howard Taft, who decided that the Supreme Court’s caseload should be decided on a discretionary basis, putting the Court in a position to dictate America’s legal agenda.

3. The justices

There are no formal requirements for becoming a Supreme Court justice. “The justices” explains that the role of justice is open to anyone who can be nominated by the president and confirmed by a majority vote. The current Supreme Court consists of nine justices. The first membership was entirely Protestant, and there were no women until 1981. The modern court lacks diversity of professional backgrounds; many of the justices were formerly judges. Some appointments, both historical and recent, have been controversial. It is not unheard of for a justice’s ideology to drift after his or her appointment, in some cases amounting to considerable changes in outlook during that justice’s time in the Court.

2. The Court at work (1)

A very small percentage of cases reach the Supreme Court. “The Court at Work” explains that even if a case meets all the criteria, the justices are still at liberty to refuse it. The Court has navigated debates about the separation of powers and conflicting approaches to interpretations of the statutes. The growth of the administrative state means that the Court is now more often tasked with determining whether administrative agencies are carrying out their duties correctly. What do cases and controversies mean to the Supreme Court? Why are these terms important, and how have the Court’s interpretations of them changed over time?

1. Origins

How does the Supreme Court in the early twenty-first century differ with regard to the intentions of the Framers in 1787? “Origins” looks at the Court’s development from a diffuse institution, with judges based at home or traveling around the country, to a secure base in the Capitol. Ever since Article III announced a national court with the authority to decide cases “arising under” the country’s Constitution, the role of the Supreme Court has been a matter of dispute. From the beginning, the Court has filled in the blanks contained in Article III. How has the modern Court become able to define and exercise its own power?

8. The Court and the world

When the Framers set the Supreme Court in motion, they had no template for what they were about to create. “The court and the world” demonstrates that other countries were able to use the Supreme Court for inspiration, and many have done so. What they have chosen to take and leave from the Court’s example is instructive. Lifetime tenure is less common outside the United States, with most European courts preferring nine- or ten-year appointments and aiming for unanimity rather than majority. While specific knowledge about the Court is limited, the U.S. Supreme Court still holds a place in the public imagination.

7. The Court and the public

“The court and the public” argues that a judge’s awareness of public opinion is not only inevitable, but also necessary. Can the Court also influence the public? The long tenures of the justices do not seem to affect the equilibrium in which the Court and the public exist. Public polls show some approval for the Supreme Court in general, rather than its specific actions. However, famously contentious cases such as Roe v. Wade reveal the intersection of public opinion and Court judgment, showing what happens when the Court feels its legitimacy is threatened. Has the Court aligned itself with public opinion over time?

5. The Court at work (2)

“The court at work (2)” looks at the significance of the marble building the justices moved into in 1935. This permanent home had both practical and symbolic weight, communicating the Court’s role at the head of a coequal branch of government. The Court has been criticized for its risk of bias, choice of cases, and focus on the “litigated Constitution” rather than structural problems that may be beyond any court’s reach. While much of the work happens behind closed doors rather than in the open sessions, the Internet has brought the Court closer to the public, with audio files and transcripts available almost in real time.