The Supreme Court is the highest federal court that is entitled to giving judicial Powers to the nation especially in the United States. It was established through the Judiciary Act of 1789 and formally received recognition in 1790. The Supreme Court receives recognition in Article III of the Constitution. This essential aspect of the judicial system ensures that various functions are fulfilled accordingly. These functions include: put in place proper procedures and rules for the federal courts and acting as the interpreter of the states and federal law. The Supreme Court comprises of a chief justice and other eight associate justices. These justices are appointed by the President in accordance to the Article III (Kian, 204). After they have been appointed they remain in office and the only way they can be removed is through impeachment by the congress. Over the years there have been many reforms where presidents attempt to increase or decrease the number of justices in order to favor their political endeavors but they have all been limited (Kian, 204).
The Supreme Court practices jurisdiction by hearing particular appeals from lower federal courts and state courts. It also issues various kinds of orders and writs that ensure its enforcement of their decisions. The Supreme Court has received much of its jurisdiction through Article III that allows it gives rulings on all the cases that affect Ambassadors, public Ministers and Consuls as well as the ones in which a state shall be party (Kian, 204). The Supreme Court gives the final decisions which cannot be appealed. Their decision may be changed through interpreting the Constitution and amending it. The Supreme Court has for many years given its mandate over the states by defining the rules and procedures to be followed by the Court and lower federal courts. Similarly it promulgates the rules that govern civil and criminal cases in the district courts (Kian, 204).
There have been many deliberations over the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and many have tried to determine their roles. This paper will focus on discussing the roles of the Supreme Court and determine how they have changed over time. This will be coupled with the procedures of the court in terms of how they carry out their procedures (Sill, 59). Additionally, it will determine how the Supreme Court has been mandated to play the role of the policy maker. It will be followed by a determination of how the Supreme Court is on the verge of delivering more power to corporations. Similarly, paper will determine the ideal role of the Supreme Court (Sill, 59).
In order to determine how the role of the Supreme Court has changed over time, it is important to consider evaluating how it affects ones personal life. This requires the understanding of the court’s procedures and the way it carries out its’ jurisdiction. To start with, the Supreme Court begins its term on the first Monday in October (Sill, 59). The term is divided into various sittings where the justices oversee the cases brought forward and give their opinions. The next step requires their intervention in recess cases where the deliberate on the issues brought forth and write opinions. These sittings and recesses alternate at intervals of two weeks (Sill, 59). The justices are however given some form of private life where they spend most of their time in the courts. Their power is reflected through decision making processes which shape the policies of the real world and politics in government. They give their insight on the laws passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President (Sill, 59).
The Supreme Court has the powers to initiate their power of choice. Despite the many petitions they receive each year, they have the mandate to rule over the cases they choose to hear. Most of the cases they choose are deliberated upon by writ of certiorari which describes an order to send up a case record from a lower court (Sill, 59). Their choose for hearing a case depends on the recommendations made by one of the judges. It occurs through the votes where if four justices vote to hear any case, it is taken up by the other nine (Sill, 59). Their choice on hearing a case depends on the implications that go beyond the parties involved. It also depends on the fact that two lower courts have reached conflicting decisions by considering the decisions in terms of how they may contradict the decisions of the Supreme Court (Sill, 59).
The Supreme Court carries critical roles where they hear and decide cases after justices have been briefed or given summaries of the arguments from the lawyers in the lower courts (Sill, 59). This occurs after they have received amici curiae which describe the briefs that have been gathered and prepared by the interest groups or government agencies that support each side of the case. The proceedings of the court are determined after the public hearing where the justices then meet in private to further analyze the case. This enables them to share ideas and make appropriate conclusions (Sill, 59). The justices take sides and the side that wins gives the decision of the court. The next procedure involves making the announcements and implementation of the decision. After voting the court announces their decision where the justices’ opinions are revealed (Sill, 59). This comes with the explanations made for each side. If the vote gives a 9-0 decision then it means that all the justices were in agreement. However, there are times when the decisions split the justices. The justices may at times agree with the decision made by the majority but reach a similar decision for different reasons that offer concurring opinion (Sill, 59).
The Supreme Court has limited powers to implement its decisions. This part of their ruling depends on the executive and the legislative arms of government to support them in the decisions they make. However, regardless of these limitations in their implementation processes the Supreme Court ensures policies that impact social change. This is one of the crucial roles they play in the political system. The role of the Supreme Court emanates from the authority it stands in the validation of the legislative and executive actions which it considers as judgments. This gives the court the mandate to ensure individual rights and maintain the constitution in order to apply the provisions that are used in complicated situations. Many of the political leaders have used the Supreme Court to change its vital role in regard to the constitution. In the past the Supreme Court adopted the constitution where state courts had changed the acts of the actions of the legislative which brought about conflicts with the constitution. For instance, Alexander Hamilton and James Madison had initiated the judicial review in Federalist Papers which prompted them to adopt the constitution.
The role of the Supreme Court was argued by Hamilton who claimed that the practice of the judicial review that ensured the will of the entire people would be supreme over the will of the legislative arm in that its statutes might only express the will of the some of the people (Brudney, 1236). On the other hand, Madison claimed that the interpretation of the constitution should only involve reasoned judgment which was upheld by independent judges (Brudney, 1236). This would be in contrary to the conflict and uproar of the processes involved in political affairs. He argued that if any issues regarding the constitution were to be deliberated and decided through bargaining of public politics, then the constitution would result to conflicts due to competing factions and partisan spirit (Brudney, 1236).
The change of the roles in the Supreme Court started way back when justices invoked their decisions in implementing the constitution and changing the role of the legislation. For instance, Chief Justice John Marshall in a case against Madison declared that the responsibility carried out by the Supreme Court to change the unconstitutional legislation brought a crucial impact in its obligation to endorse the Constitution (Brudney, 1236). It was the role of the judicial department to give the direction in which the law would follow. The constitution played a significant role through its interpretation and application as it gave room for future changes (Brudney, 1236). This mandated it to allow any changes that could be interpreted in the future. The roles of the Supreme Court gave it a nature that required the major attributes to be marked, and the essential objects were to be delegated in accordance to the minor aspects. Similarly, these objects were to be presumed in accordance to the main aspects.
The aspect upheld by the Supreme Court in giving the final decision was challenged by Chief Justice Marshall who indicated that there was a huge task involved in the maintenance of free government. This meant that people should consider the constitution as the guiding principle that was in place to give direction among the people for ages (Brudney, 1236). However, the constitution was open for changes that required adoption of the issues that affected humans. The Supreme Courts ensures this policy by maintaining its powers which include: the interpretation of the Constitution, reviewing the judicial roles, giving interpretation of the laws, ensuring that integrity and faithfulness is applied and dealing with any cases that involved the Constitution (Brudney, 1236). This included the treaties made by federal laws as well as any disputes that emerged within the state. It also ensures that appropriate measures and laws are applied as they are written in the legislative arm. This is accompanied by the enforcement of the laws given to the executive arm of government (Brudney, 1236).
However, despite all these roles the Supreme Court has encountered various changes in the way they implement and uphold their jurisdiction. This has been evidenced through the various changes that have been made in the constitution to incorporate other factors that may affect the state at different levels (Kian, 204). One of the areas that have brought about change in the role of the Supreme Court is their ability to deliver more power over the corporations within a nation. This has occurred due to many changes that have emerged with the changing times (Kian, 204). These issues involve the freedom of religion and health insurance as well as other aspects. The Supreme Court has been mandated to give their insight and make appropriate decisions regarding these issues as they bring controversy in the lower courts. It has also brought about changes due to the fact that it issues.
The changes in the role of the Supreme Court have come about due to the changes in the rights pertaining religion and health of the people. The Five Right wing has advocated for these changes in order to incorporate the artificial prospects that determine the restrictions against women in terms of the contraceptives accessible to them at their workplaces as provided by the health insurance plans. This also occurs due to the allegations of the court aspects to advocate for the corporations (Kian, 204). They argue that since the corporations ensure the First Amendment rights of freedom of through their financial activities of political propaganda, then there is a need to extend the rights in terms of religion (Kian, 204). Their actions are seen through the influence they impact on the results of the states elections. The Supreme Court has been challenged to consider that fact that corporations have impacted the people in terms of whom or what determines the elections. Therefore, they should consider religious choices in the corporations as they have more say in the personal and moral judgments who take part in the corporations (Kian, 204).
The Supreme Court has changed its roles in order to involve the ideologies of other people or corporations given within the Constitution depending on the political opinions and partisan needs. This has brought about the issues of using legal aspects that ensure some form of ruling (Kian, 204). The Constitution allows people to make their rights depending on the Voting Rights Act. Amendments have been made in order to incorporate those people who have more impact on the nation. For instance, there were many reasons given for the razing of the Voting Rights regardless of the Fifth Amendment made in the constitution that mandated the Congress to react to any measures that seemed necessary for ensuring the voting rights among the minorities categorized due to race (Kian, 204). Similarly, the Five Right wing initiated a right that that limited the states against behaviors of discrimination in order to facilitate the input of Republicans and right-wingers towards winning the elections (Kian, 204).
In addition to this, the Supreme Court has been mandated to change their roles in order to give a justified ruling on the aspects that keep emerging every now and then. They have changed their roles due to the amendments made that alter the decisions or perspective of the justices due to the impact the issue might have on the society. For instance, the issue of gay married has brought about many controversies as lower courts have encountered conflicting opinions in terms of the cases (Sill, 59). Many issues have emerged over this issue as amendments have altered the classic policies that were issued depending on the rights of people. The freedom of expression has raised concerns and impacted the Supreme Court as many people have argued that it should incorporate even the minority groups (Sill, 59). This has driven them to change their ruling and issuing of decisions as they would not want to impact the nature of the ability of people to vote. Similarly, this is an essential matter that requires much deliberation as it might impact the decision made by the people. Therefore, the Supreme Court has had to change their ruling and ensuring that the policies do not alter the directions taken by the people. It might also involved the changing the laws and policies ensured by the legislative and executive arms of government (Sill, 59).
Changes in the role of the Supreme Court have occurred in terms of the way it impact the voting process. These changes are made in order to avoid the instability of the nation or ensuring that the appropriate leader gets to power (Sill, 59). Justices have over the years made rulings over the issues of the voting process where for instance they stopped the vote counting process in the year 2000 which saw Bush rise to power (Sill, 59). This was regardless of the fact that George W. Bush’s opponent Al Gore had gained more votes. The change came about due to the fact that he was considered the appropriate leader. He was also the favored by the justices in the five right wing where the justices issued issues to hinder the process of counting votes as there were issues related to the tallying of votes. This would have altered and affected the image for President Bush (Sill, 59).
In addition to this, the roles of the Supreme Court have changed over the years due to the amendments in the constitution where Obamacare has brought about controversies that need deliberation. The Affordable Act that was enacted in 2012 where Justices rejected the clause that initiated the commerce act that was the major aspect that supported the law. It also brought about the aspect where the Five Right Wing which enabled the leaders elected had the mandate of enacting the decision that they deemed appropriate. It also allowed them to meet to the demands of the welfare of the public. These powers within the Supreme Court enable it to regulate commerce between states.
The ideal role of the Supreme Court involves ensuring that the justices to be given a specialized platform where they would address the issues. Their roles have revolved into allowing the people to seek public notifications over the issues that bring about controversies. They have initiated the issues over the media coverage in terms the issues that are beliefs and identities of the experiences of the justices. It also involves maintaining the nominations and confirmations to be upheld by the court. This should be observed through the way they maintain the constitution and ensure that all the rights of people by conforming to the changes made in the evolving world.
Works Cited
Brudney, James J.; Ditslear, Corey. "THE WARP AND WOOF OF STATUTORY INTERPRETATION: COMPARING SUPREME COURT APPROACHES IN TAX LAW AND WORKPLACE LAW." Duke Law Journal 58.7 (2009): 1231-1311. Web.
Kian, Sina. "THE PATH OF THE CONSTITUTION: THE ORIGINAL SYSTEM OF REMEDIES, HOW IT CHANGED, AND HOW THE COURT RESPONDED." New York University Law Review 87.1 (2012): 136-207. Web.
Sill, Kaitlyn L.; Metzgar, Emily T.; Rouse, Stella M. "Media Coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court: How Do Journalists Assess the Importance of Court Decisions?" Political Communication 30.1 (2013): 58-80. Web.
