Encyclopedia
The
Supreme Court of the United States is the highest judicial body in the
United States and leads the judicial branch of the
United States federal government.
The court consists of the
Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, who are nominated by the
President and confirmed with the "
advice and consent" of the
Senate. Appointed to serve for life, they can be removed only by resignation, or by
impeachment and subsequent conviction. The only Justice ever impeached,
Samuel Chase, was not removed from office because he was acquitted by the Senate.
The Supreme Court is the only court established by the
United States Constitution ; all other federal courts are created by
Congress:
- The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behavior, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.
The Supreme Court holds both original and appellate jurisdiction, with its appellate jurisdiction accounting for most of the Court's caseload. The court's original jurisdiction is narrowly focused, as defined in Article III, Section 2 . The court's appellate jurisdiction encompasses "all cases" within the scope of Article III, but is subject to limitation by acts of Congress under the Exceptions Clause in Article III and by the discretion of the Court.
The Supreme Court meets in
Washington, D.C., in the
United States Supreme Court building. The Court is sometimes referred to by the abbreviations
SCOTUS and
USSC . The Court's yearly terms start on the first Monday in October and finish sometime during the following June or July. Each term consists of alternating two week intervals. During the first interval, the court is in session and hears cases, and during the second interval, the court is recessed to consider and write opinions on cases they have heard.
History
The History of the Supreme Court is generally told in terms of the Chief Justices who have presided over it.
Initially, during the tenures of Chief Justices Jay, Rutledge, and
Ellsworth , the Court lacked a home of its own and any real prestige.
That changed forever during the
Marshall Court , which declared the Court to be the supreme arbiter of the Constitution , and made a number of important rulings which gave shape and substance to the Constitutional balance of power between the Federal government and the states. But
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee showed the limits of that federal power—although the U.S. High Court declared itself supreme over the Virginia state court, it had a difficult time enforcing its judgment in a hostile state. The Marshall Court ended the practice of each judge issuing his opinion
seriatim, a remnant of British tradition, and instead one majority opinion of the Court was issued. The Marshall Court also saw Congress impeach a sitting Justice,
Samuel Chase, who was acquitted. This impeachment was one piece of the power struggle between the Jeffersonians and the Federalists after the election of 1800 and the subsequent change in power. The failure to remove Chase is thought to signal the recognition by Congress of judicial independence.
The
Taney Court made a number of important rulings, such as
Sheldon v. Sill, which held that while Congress may not limit the subjects the Supreme Court may hear, the Constitution does not so restrain it where lower courts are concerned. However, it is primarily remembered for its ruling in
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 [i], known as the "
Dred Scott Case" or the " ...
, the case which may have helped precipitate the
United States Civil War. In the years following the Civil War, the
Chase, Waite, and Fuller courts interpreted the new civil war amendments to the Constitution, and developed the doctrine of substantive due process . Under the White and
Taft courts , the substantive due process doctrine reached its first apogee , and the Court held that the 14th Amendment applied some provisions of the Bill of Rights to the states .
During the
Hughes,
Stone, and Vinson courts , the court gained its own accommodation and radically changed its interpretation of the Constitution in order to facilitate the
New Deal , giving an expansive reading to the powers of the Federal Government. The
Warren Court made a number of alternately celebrated and controversial rulings expanding the application of the Constitution to civil liberties, leading a renaissance in substantive due process. It held that segregation was unconstitutional , that the Constitution protects a general right to privacy , that schools cannot have official prayer or
mandatory Bible readings , dramatically increased the scope of the doctrine of incorporation , read an
equal protection clause into the Fifth Amendment , held that the states may not apportion a chamber of their legislatures in the manner in which the United States Senate is apportioned , and held that the Constitution requires active compliance .
The
Burger Court ruled that abortion was a constitutional right , reached muddled and controversial rulings on affirmative action and campaign finance regulation , and that the
death penalty was unconstitutional and then later that it was
not unconstitutional .
The
Rehnquist Court narrowed the focus of the private right of action, the right of labor unions to picket and of
Roe v. Wade but dramatically circumscribed the ability of states to regulate abortion , gave sweeping meaning to ERISA pre-emption thereby denying plaintiffs access to state court with the consequence of limiting compensation for tort like harm to medical patients covered by employer plans to very circumscribed remedies and began an instauration of federalism, limiting the scope of Congressional power under the Commerce Clause .
The
Roberts Court began with the confirmation and swearing in of
John Roberts on September 29, 2005, and is the current court.
Composition
Size of the court
The United States Constitution does not specify the size of the Supreme Court; instead, Congress has the power to fix the number of Justices. Originally, the total number of Justices was set at six by the
Judiciary Act of 1789. As the country grew geographically, the number of Justices steadily increased. The court was expanded to seven members in 1807, nine in 1837 and ten in 1863. In 1866, however, Congress wished to deny President
Andrew Johnson any Supreme Court appointments, and therefore passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which provided that the next three Justices to retire would not be replaced; thus, the size of the Court would eventually reach seven by attrition. Consequently, one seat was removed in 1866 and a second in 1867. By the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, the number of Justices was again set at nine , where it has remained ever since. President
Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court ; his plan would have allowed the President to appoint one new, additional justice for every justice who reached the age of seventy but did not retire from the bench, until the Court reached a maximum size of fifteen justices. Ostensibly, this was to ease the burdens of the docket on the elderly judges, but it was widely believed that the President's actual purpose was to add Justices who would favor his
New Deal policies, which had been regularly ruled unconstitutional by the Court. This plan, referred to often as the Court Packing Plan, failed in Congress. The Court, however, moved from its opposition to Roosevelt's New Deal programs, rendering the President's effort moot . In any case, Roosevelt's long tenure in the White House allowed him to appoint eight Justices to the Supreme Court and promote one Associate Justice to Chief Justice.
Nomination, confirmation and tenure of Justices
Per Article II of the
United States Constitution, the power to appoint Justices belongs to the
President of the United States, acting with the advice and consent of the Senate. As a general rule, Presidents nominate individuals who broadly share their ideological views. However, nominees whose views are perceived as extreme may be blocked by the Senate . In many cases, a Justice's decisions may be contrary to what the nominating President anticipated. A famous instance was Chief Justice
Earl Warren; President
Eisenhower expected him to be a conservative judge, but his decisions are arguably among the most liberal in the Court's history. Eisenhower later called the appointment "the biggest damn fool mistake I ever made".
While the President may
nominate anyone , the "
advice and consent" of the Senate is required for
appointment. The confirmation process often attracts considerable attention from special interest groups, many of whom lobby senators to confirm or to reject. The Senate Judiciary Committee conducts hearings, questioning nominees to determine their suitability. Thereafter, the whole Senate considers the nomination; a simple majority vote is required to confirm or to reject a nominee. Rejections are relatively uncommon; the Senate has explicitly rejected only twelve Supreme Court nominees in its history. The most recent rejection of a nominee came in 1987, when the Senate refused to confirm
Robert Bork. In 1991, Clarence Thomas's nomination was hampered by allegations of sexual harassment, but the Senate eventually confirmed him by a vote of 52-48.
Not everyone nominated by the President has received a floor vote in the Senate. For example, a nominee may be filibustered. A filibuster indefinitely prolongs debate thereby preventing a final vote on the nominee. It is also possible for the President to withdraw a nominee's name at any time before the actual confirmation vote occurs. This usually happens when the President feels that the nominee has little chance of being confirmed. Most recently, President
George W. Bush granted a request by
Harriet Miers to withdraw her 2005 nomination before even a committee hearing had been scheduled, citing her concerns about Senate requests for access to internal White House documents during the confirmation process. Prior to that, President
Ronald Reagan in 1987 withdrew the name of
Douglas H. Ginsburg soon after the announcement of his nomination because allegations of marijuana use had arisen concerning him.
While the filibuster of a Supreme Court nominee may be an option to bar their confirmation, no nominee for Associate Justice has ever been filibustered. As a sitting Associate Justice of the Court, Abe Fortas's nomination to become Chief Justice was successfully filibustered in 1968. President Johnson had nominated him to be Chief Justice of the United States after
Earl Warren retired.
Until the 1980s, the approval process of Justices was frequently quick. From the Truman through Nixon administrations, Justices were typically approved in a month. From the Reagan administration through the current administration of George W. Bush, however, the process took much longer. Some speculate this is because of the increasing political role Justices play.
When the Senate is in recess, the President may make a temporary appointment without the Senate's advice and consent. Such a recess appointee to the Supreme Court holds office only until the end of the next Senate session . To continue to serve thereafter, the nominee must be confirmed by the Senate. Of the two Chief Justices and six Associate Justices who have received recess appointments, only Chief Justice John Rutledge was not subsequently confirmed for a full term.
The Constitution provides that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior" . The term "good behavior" is interpreted to mean life. However, Justices may resign, retire into senior status, or be removed by impeachment and conviction by congressional vote . On average, a vacancy arises every two years; however, long stretches without any vacancies occur from time to time. For instance, no vacancy arose for the eleven years between Stephen Breyer's appointment in 1994 and Chief Justice
William Rehnquist's death in 2005.
The Supreme Court's
jurisprudence is often evaluated with respect to the service of a particular Chief Justice. Thus, for example, the Court between 1969 and 1986 is referred to as the "Burger Court" and the Court between 1986 and 2005 is referred to as the "Rehnquist Court" .
Other functions
Under the
Judiciary Act of 1789, each Justice was required to "ride circuit," or to travel within the assigned circuit and consider cases alongside local judges. This practice, however, encountered opposition from many Justices, who complained about the difficulty of travel. Moreover, several individuals opposed it on the grounds that a Justice could not be expected to be impartial in an appeal if he had previously decided the same case while riding circuit. Circuit riding was abolished in 1891. Now, the duty of a Supreme Court Justice in this regard is generally limited to hearing emergency petitions in the relevant circuit and some other routine tasks like addressing certain requests for extensions of time. The Justice assigned to a given circuit is known within that circuit as "the Circuit Justice" and may, but in practice almost never does, sit as a judge of that circuit. A Circuit Justice takes precedence over the Chief Judge of the circuit when a Justice decides to sit.
The Chief Justice is usually assigned to the District of Columbia Circuit, the Federal Circuit and the Fourth Circuit ; each Associate Justice is assigned to one or two judicial circuits.
After Associate Justice Alito's appointment, circuits were assigned as follows:
- For the D.C. Circuit, John G. Roberts, Jr.
- For the First Circuit, David H. Souter
- For the Second Circuit, Ruth Bader Ginsburg
- For the Third Circuit, David H. Souter
- For the Fourth Circuit, John G. Roberts, Jr.
- For the Fifth Circuit, Antonin G. Scalia
- For the Sixth Circuit, John Paul Stevens
- For the Seventh Circuit, John Paul Stevens
- For the Eighth Circuit, Samuel A. Alito, Jr.
- For the Ninth Circuit, Anthony M. Kennedy
- For the Tenth Circuit, Stephen G. Breyer
- For the Eleventh Circuit, Clarence Thomas
- For the Federal Circuit, John G. Roberts, Jr.
The circuit assignments frequently, but do not always and need not, reflect the geographic regions where the assigned Justices served as judges or practitioners before joining the Supreme Court. Four of the current Justices are assigned to circuits on which they once sat as circuit judges: Chief Justice Roberts , Justice Souter , Justice Stevens , and Justice Kennedy . Furthermore, Justices Thomas and Ginsburg are assigned to the circuits that include their home states .
Current membership
The current Justices of the United States Supreme Court, in order of seniority, are:
| Name | Photo | Date of birth | Age | Home state | Appt. by | Conf. vote | First day | Prior positions |
|---|
| John Roberts | | January 271955 | 51 | Maryland | G.W. Bush | 78-22 | September 292005 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ; Private practice ; Principal Deputy Solicitor General ; Private practice ; Associate Counsel to the President ; Special Assistant to the Attorney General |
| John Paul Stevens | | April 201920 | 86 | Illinois | Ford | 98-0 | December 191975 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ; Private practice ; Lecturer, University of Chicago Law School ; Lecturer, Northwestern University School of Law |
| Antonin Scalia | | March 111936 | 70 | Virginia | Reagan | 98-0 | September 261986 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ; Professor, University of Chicago Law School ; Assistant Attorney General ; Professor, University of Virginia School of Law |
| Anthony Kennedy | | July 231936 | 70 | California | Reagan | 97-0 | February 181988 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ; Professor, McGeorge School of Law, University of the Pacific ; Private practice |
| David Souter | | September 171939 | 67 | New Hampshire | G.H.W. Bush | 90-9 | October 91990 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ; Associate Justice, New Hampshire Supreme Court ; Associate Justice, New Hampshire Superior Court ; Attorney General of New Hampshire ; Deputy Attorney General of New Hampshire ; Assistant Attorney General of New Hampshire ; Private practice . |
| Clarence Thomas | | June 231948 | 58 | Georgia | G.H.W. Bush | 52-48 | October 231991 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ; Chairman, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ; Legislative Assistant for Missouri Senator John Danforth ; employed by Monsanto Inc. ; Assistant Attorney General of Missouri under State Attorney General John Danforth |
| Ruth Bader Ginsburg | | March 151933 | 73 | New York | Clinton | 97-3 | August 101993 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ; General Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union ; Professor, Columbia Law School ; Professor, Rutgers University School of Law |
| Stephen Breyer | | August 151938 | 68 | Mass. | Clinton | 87-9 | August 31994 | Chief Judge, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ; Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ; Professor, Harvard Law School |
| Samuel Alito | | April 11950 | 56 | New Jersey | G.W. Bush | 58-42 | January 312006 | Circuit Judge, Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ; Professor, Seton Hall University School of Law ; U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey ; Deputy Assistant Attorney General ; Assistant to the Solicitor General ; Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey |
As of 2006, the average age is 66 years.
See also Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Retired justices
Research suggests that justices are often strategic in their decisions to leave the bench with personal, institutional, and partisan factors playing a role. The fear of mental decline and death oftern preculudes justices from stepping down. The desire to maximize the Court's strength and legitimacy through one retirement at a time, when the Court in in recess, and during non-presidential election years suggests a concern for institutional health. Finally, if at all possible, justices seek to depart under favorable presidents and senates to ensure that a like-minded successor will be appointed.
Currently, there is only one retired Justice of the Supreme Court,
Sandra Day O'Connor, who announced her intent to retire in 2005 and was replaced by Justice Alito in 2006.
Seniority and seating
During Court sessions, the Justices sit according to seniority, with the Chief Justice in the center, and the Associate Justices on alternating sides, with the most senior Associate Justice on the Chief Justice's immediate right, and the most junior Associate Justice seated on the left farthest away from the Chief Justice. Therefore, the current court sits as follows from left to right when looking at the bench from the perspective of a lawyer arguing before the Court:
Breyer, Thomas, Kennedy, Stevens , Roberts , Scalia, Souter, Ginsburg and Alito .
Political leanings
Seven of the current justices of the court were appointed by Republican Presidents, while two were nominated by a Democrat. In legal circles, it is popularly accepted that Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are thought of as the Court's
conservative wing, Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer are generally thought of as the Court's liberal wing, and Justice Kennedy is considered a moderate conservative, and the swing vote who usually determines the outcome of close cases.
Quarters
The Supreme Court occupied various spaces in the
United States Capitol until 1935, when it moved into its own purpose-built home at One First Street Northeast, Washington, DC. The four-story building was designed in a classical style sympathetic to the surrounding buildings of the
Capitol complex and
Library of Congress by architect
Cass Gilbert, and is clad in marble quarried chiefly in Vermont. The building includes space for the Courtroom, Justices' chambers, an extensive law library, various meeting spaces, and auxiliary services such as workshop, stores, cafeteria and a gymnasium. The Supreme Court building is within the ambit of the
Architect of the Capitol, but maintains its own police force, separate from the Capitol Police.
Jurisdiction
Article Three of the United States Constitution outlines the jurisdiction of the federal courts of the United States:
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party; to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States; between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
The jurisdiction of the federal courts was further limited by the
Eleventh Amendment, which forbade the federal courts from hearing cases "commenced or prosecuted against [a State] by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State." However, the Eleventh Amendment is not deemed to apply if a state consents to be sued . Moreover, the Supreme Court has ruled that Congress may abrogate the states' immunity from lawsuits in certain circumstances. In addition to constitutional constraints, the jurisdiction of the federal courts is also limited by various federal laws. For example, the federal courts may consider "Controversies ... between Citizens of different States" only if the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000; otherwise, the case may only be brought in state courts.
The Constitution specifies that the Supreme Court may exercise original jurisdiction in cases affecting ambassadors and other diplomats, and in cases in which a state is a party. In all other cases, however, the Supreme Court has only appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court considers cases based on its original jurisdiction very rarely; almost all cases are brought to the Supreme Court on appeal. In practice, the only original jurisdiction cases heard by the Court are disputes between two or more states.
The power of the Supreme Court to consider appeals from state courts, rather than just federal courts, was created by the
Judiciary Act of 1789 and upheld early in the Court's history, by its rulings in
Martin v. Hunter's Lessee and
Cohens v. Virginia . The Supreme Court is the only federal court that has jurisdiction over direct appeals from state court decisions, although there are a variety of devices that permit so-called "collateral review" of state cases.
The Supreme Court may only hear actual cases and controversies. It does not hear moot cases or issue advisory opinions. However, the Court may consider some cases, such as
Roe v. Wade, , is a landmark [i] United States Supreme Court [i]...
, that become moot during the judicial process, if it appears that the legal issue involved is likely to arise again but would not be reviewable by the Court under a strict mootness analysis.
"Roe" had already had her baby when the case came to the Supreme Court, because judicial activity takes much longer than human gestation. Because future abortion cases would face the same time constraints, the Court decided the case in spite of its mootness.
The Supreme Court is not required to hear every case presented to it. In cases that are heard by a three-judge
United States district court , there is a right of appeal directly to the Supreme Court, although the Court may dispose of these appeals by summary order if it does not believe they are important enough for full briefing and argument. In most instances, however, the party must petition the Supreme Court for a writ of
certiorari. By custom,
certiorari is granted on the vote of four of the nine Justices. In most cases, the writ is denied; the Supreme Court normally only considers matters of national or constitutional importance. If the Court refuses to grant
certiorari, it does not comment on the merits of the case; the decision of the lower court stands unchanged as if Supreme Court review had not been requested.
Court reports and citation style
Supreme Court decisions are typically cited as in the following example: "
Roe v. Wade, , is a landmark [i] United States Supreme Court [i]...
, 410 U.S. 113 ." The citation consists of the names of the opposing parties; the volume number; "U.S." ; the page number on which the decision begins; and the year in which the case was decided. The names of the opposing parties are listed in the format "
Petitioner v. Respondent" or "
Appellant v. Appellee." The
Reporter of Decisions is responsible for publication of the Court's rulings. There are two other widely-used reporters: the Supreme Court Reporter and the Lawyer's Edition, corresponding to two privately-published collections of decisions. For more information on how these reports are cited
, see
case citation.
Checks and balances
The Constitution does not explicitly grant the Supreme Court the power of judicial review; nevertheless, the power of the Supreme Court to overturn laws and executive actions it deems unlawful or unconstitutional is a well-established precedent. Many of the Founding Fathers accepted the notion of judicial review; in
Federalist No. 78,
Alexander Hamilton writes: "A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute." The Supreme Court first established its power to declare laws unconstitutional in
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 [i] , is a landmark case [i] in United States [i] law [i] ...
, consummating the system of checks and balances.
The Supreme Court cannot directly enforce its rulings; instead, it relies on respect for the Constitution and for the law for adherence to its judgments. One notable instance of nonacquiescence came in 1832, when the state of
Georgia ignored the Supreme Court's decision in
Worcester v. Georgia , was a case in which the United States Supreme Court [i] ...
. President
Andrew Jackson, who sided with the Georgia courts, is supposed to have remarked, "
John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!"; however, this quotation is likely apocryphal. State militia in the South also resisted the desegregation of public schools after the 1954 judgment
Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483 [i] , is a landmark decision [i] o ...
. More recently, many feared that President
Richard Nixon would refuse to comply with the Court's order in
