7-9 pages
APA STYLE
ZERO PLAGIARISM
After reading the landmark decisions of Plessy v. Ferguson, 163 U.S. 537 (1896) and Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966), discuss the following in a paper of 7-9 pages:
- What factors influenced each of these decisions?
- Read the dissenting opinions as well.
- Explore to what extent political ideology influences constitutional law.
- To support your points, identify specific examples in the language of both the decisions and the dissents.
- Examine the political climate when both cases were decided.
- Look at what philosophical underpinnings may have influenced the thinking of the court of the respective eras of these cases. How did the courts in each era read the U.S. Constitution differently?
- Landmark decision (required reading)
- Politics and the U.S. Supreme Court Constitutional law students will quickly come to recognize that the U.S. Constitution is a legal and political document. Too often individuals fail to realize that Constitutional law is influenced by the political climate and the politics of the justices on the Supreme Court. The appointment process for Supreme Court Judges is fraught with political and ideological battles that are played out during the U.S. Senate confirmation hearing. While most U.S. Presidents will argue that they seek to appoint a Supreme Court Judge who is free of any prior ethical challenges, someone with judicial temperament and balance, and who is free of any political ideology and prejudicial thoughts; in actuality, most appointees to the U.S. Supreme Court reflect the thinking of the sitting president’s political philosophy.
Many would argue that each Supreme Court case is decided on the merits of the case, which in theory is correct; political ideology is an element of the court’s deliberation process and a major factor in the final decision.
The judicial review power, the authority of the Supreme Court to be the final interpreter of the Constitution that emerged during the leadership of Chief Justice John Marshall, could be viewed as an early indication of the political power and influence the Supreme Court would eventually have. Laws emerging from Supreme Court decisions have wide and long-lasting impact—sometimes more impacting than the executive and legislative branches of government.
Social Movements and the U.S. Supreme Court
It is interesting to note that throughout the history of the Supreme Court, social movements such as the following have not only split the United States population, they have also divided the judges on the Supreme Court:- federalism
- states’ rights
- slavery
- the rights of the federal government to regulate tariff and impose regulatory mandates
- the federal government’s involvement in economic support
- civil rights
- abortion
- gun control legislations
- capital punishment
- separation of church and state
- other ideological issues
This divide is often reflected in the majority and dissenting opinions of the Supreme Court. The impact of social movements and the philosophical position of each justice on the Supreme Court are often captured in their written opinions in the cases they decide. It’s important for those studying constitutional law to not only read the majority opinion in a case but also the dissenting position. Often times, the dissenting opinion becomes the majority opinion when there is a personnel change on the bench of the Supreme Court and the court reverses itself.
U.S. Supreme Court Eras
A Supreme Court or judicial era is best understood as an ideological or political position shared by the majority of the justices on the Supreme Court that is woven into all similar and even different court decisions.
During the early era of the court, there was very little stability. Appointees to the Supreme Court in the early era did not view the court with the level of respect that it now enjoys. Some members resigned their seat on the Supreme Court to run for elected office in their states; among these individuals was the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Jay.
It was not until about 1801 with the appointment of Chief Justice John Marshall did the Supreme Court establish its authority and control as outlined in Article III of the Constitution. Chief Justice Marshall’s federalist ideology (strong central government) led to the court ruling in favor of the central government and the Supreme Court as having the final decisions in constitutional disputes. During the Marshall era, the powers of Congress, the President, and the Supreme Court grew—as noted in Marbury v. Madison (1803) and Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee(1816), where the federalist ideology and the authority of the U.S. Supreme Court is the dominant theme.
U.S. Supreme Court ErasPost-Marshall PeriodThe Marshall period was followed by the Taney era. The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Robert Taney could be characterized by an ideological swing toward states’ rights. This court was most noted for the Dred Scott v. Sandford 1856 decision. In this landmark decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that slaves being property of their respective states had no U.S. Constitutional protection. In essence, slavery is a state issue that should not be reviewed by the federal government or federal court system (Hall & Feldmeier, 2009).
In less than 10 years after the Dred Scott decision and the civil war, the 13th Amendment to the Constitution was ratified, abolishing slavery in the United States. The 13th Amendment was followed by the 14th, which extended the concept of due process and equal protection under the law to all citizens of the United States. During the Reconstruction era, the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution were carefully scrutinized by the existent Supreme Court members because many individuals were still troubled by the federal government move to outlaw slavery.
Pre New Deal Court Era
In spite of the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions shifted toward supporting states’ rights to limit the federal government from regulating interstate commerce and having control over the local state governments. Using the language of the 14th amendment, the court supported the states’ argument for segregation.
Influenced by the growing segregation movement in the southern states, the decision in Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the U.S. Supreme Court developed the doctrine of separate but equal, which is one example of the U.S. Supreme Court’s ideological position during this era.
During the New Deal era, the U.S. Supreme Court witnessed an ideological shift from states’ rights to an embrace of federalist agenda that led to the support of several federal legislations that were challenged during the presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Hall & Feldmeier, 2009).
Following was the Warren Court era, so named in recognition of the work of Chief Justice Earl Warren, who was known for many landmark decisions based on interpreting the U.S. Constitution from a liberal perspective. The Warren Court viewed the Constitution as a document designed to protect civil and individual rights. Scholars agree that during the Warren era much constitutional law was established (Hall & Feldmeier, 2009). The composition of the U.S. Supreme Court during the Warren period was viewed to be an activist court. There were four liberal-thinking justices on the bench during the Warren era including the Chief Justices William Douglas, Hugo Black, William Brennan, and later Thurgood Marshall (the first African-American to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court). The criminal justice procedure that is followed today in the United States was shaped by the Warren Court. Landmark cases during the Warren era involved expanding the rights and privileges of American citizens. The famous Miranda rights warnings were developed by the Warren Court, Miranda v. Arizona (1966), as well as the exclusionary rule (illegally obtained evidence is inadmissible in court) in the landmark case of Mapp v. Ohio (1961).
The U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Warren Burger, the Burger Court era, was a more centrist court that emphasized law and order. Notwithstanding the moderate position of the Burger Court of not wanting to overturn previous court cases, the Burger Court decided one of the most controversial cases in recent times: Roe v. Wade (1973). Under the privacy act, the court decided that women are allowed to have an abortion within clearly defined limits.
During the Rehnquist era the Supreme Court shifted toward a more conservative philosophy and sought to return some of the privacy rights the Warren Court had articulated earlier. This shift also reflected the political conservatism movement that existed in the United States. The Roberts Court era to follow was also dominated by many conservative judges with a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.
Reference
Hall, D. E., & Feldmeier, J. P. (2009). Constitutional values: Government powers and individual values. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.