Blog Post #2

 Reflection on the U.S. Supreme Court

Being assigned to watch two videos on the Supreme Court, the most powerful judicial body on Earth, was fascinating. The beginning of the first video helped me to learn some general information: there are nine justices, they are trained in the law, and serve an average of 16 years. The court receives 100 new cases every week about 7,000 a year, many being written explanations of why people disagree with past court rulings, and the justices meet weekly in conference to decide what cases they will accept and decide and discuss/vote on cases that have already been argued.

Besides these facts, I didn’t know much about the Supreme Court and I haven’t found it to come up in many conversations I’ve been a part of. Other than the Roe v. Wade decision in February 2022, I haven’t heard of other more recent cases being referenced in school or daily conversation. Cases involving large ideas like racism aren’t, I wouldn’t as relevant, but something I haven't had to worry about seeing solved or disputed over. The Dred Scott (seen left) decision interested me as it shifted the view of the Supreme Court for many people. It added so much to the controversy of abolishing slavery, creating more tension in the country, and helped spark the start of the civil war. Learning of one case having so much influence made me understand Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s point of current justice’s having an advantage; they can refer to and learn from the 200 years of history of the court and are able to see “ the folly of ideas" and "wisdom of others.”

Something I never considered before watching the video was how the justices can’t act as activists and bring their own ideas of problems to the court; they have to wait for the people to bring it to them. After pondering this idea, I realized how it could be very problematic if justices could present their own criticisms and issues whenever they wished. While they help in the process of change, they themselves must focus on staying impartial. One justice made the comparison of being appointed to the court as being struck by lightning. While I always assumed being in a justice’s position would be overwhelming, it goes far beyond what I had imagined. Justice David H. Souter shared that a few of his colleagues said it can take 3-5 years to become more comfortable, saying they only start doing their work properly when they forget they are there, which takes time.

I didn’t realize how much opinion writing is involved in a justice’s work. The second video explains it’s the most time consuming part of their position because their decision binds all other courts to their reasoning. I was shocked to know this process can take up to months, the first draft of each justice’s reasoning taking about 4 weeks alone! Justices often redraft in order to put their best effort into swaying the others to their opinion. The opinions with the court case decisions that are published, can range from a few pages to 80. It’s clear how much effort each justice puts into each case.

It has to be daunting being a new justice around the other members of court who have been to multiple conferences and have more experience. I like how watching video allows the viewer to get an inside look into how justice feels. After all, when someone is so respected and has power, it can be hard to remember they are human; just like us they have a hard time entering new situations or accepting when they have the right to weigh in and certain privileges.

Justice Sandra O’ Connor emphasized the fact each case gets the same individual consideration. It doesn’t matter the status of whoever wrote and submitted it, everyone will be considered. I admired Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist’s system of letting each justice talk before one of them talks twice so everyone can share their thoughts. In class discussions, I have found it difficult to add in my two cents at times because the same few of my peers would regularly speak and not really give the opportunity for more voices to enter the conversation. Sometimes I am part of few that can get caught up and not realize how our additions may be taking away from someone else's speaking power. It’s a great idea to adopt a simple system such as Chief Justice Wiliam H Rehnquist’s so everyone feels they have the chance to share their perspective.