supreme courts reactivity to popular will in modern times
The Supreme Court safeguards much of its power by creating walls to separate its power from public opinion and political pandering. And while impartiality is undoubtedly the preeminent characteristic desirable in a justice, it is impossible to nominate a human being that is not at least partially fallible and swayed by the society around him. The Warren Court of 1953 to 1969 perfectly illustrates the concurrent philosophies of the Court with the prevailing political party of the day. The growing thought of the time was for increased civil rights and an activist government. President Eisenhower integrated the military and was a strong voice for racial reconciliation. John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson were liberals who were both interested in achieving the Great Society, with racial equality a chief goal. In 1954 the Warren Court unanimously followed the trend of the time, and ruled in Brown v. Board of Ed. that separating blacks from whites was inherently unequal, thereby paving the way for the entire civil rights movement. In '64 the court continued to reflect public opinion, when it chose to accept the very loose interpretation of the interstate commerce clause to further it's activist agenda in the Heart of Atlanta
However, the Burger Court hardly created the rightist haven Nixon and Republicans had been hoping for upon Warren's retirement. The Court has expanded police rights in search and seizure, expanding probable cause to so much as running away from a crime scene. Many of its decisions were close, and very unpopular in large chunks of the country. The Burger Court did take a blow at the liberal affirmative action in Bakke v. The scaling back of government power is exactly what the Reagan administration would have wanted. In terms of the checks and balances of the Court system, the constitution has provided amply. However, the second half of the court's tenure has come under the Democratic Clinton administration. Des Moines ('69), as did its Democratic counterparts in Congress and the White House. As George Wallace's successful 3rd party run in '68 proved, there was quite a large percentage of the country that was vehemently against the Warren Court's decisions. It is the very structure of the Supreme Court which is intended to protect the decisions from following "election returns. The Supreme Court is obviously in some relation to the popular will. If the Supreme Court is unanimously ruling against the President, a President who appointed justices who would cast votes against him then it becomes quite obvious that the Courts feel little if any overt obligation to protect the interests of those who put them there.
Common topics in this essay:
Supreme Court,
Warren Court,
Democratic Clinton,
President President,
Burger Court,
Board Ed,
Act Court,
Roe Wade,
Lemon Kurtzmeyer,
Nixon Republicans,
burger court,
warren court,
supreme court,
public opinion,
interstate commerce clause,
civil rights,
act court,
elected government,
circumstances nation,
election returns,
limited own,
|
Acceptance Essays
