The Functioning of the Supreme Court - Essay Example

Critical Examination Of an Work Similar to the centers of actual storms, theSupreme Court is a peaceful place. In spite of conflict of ideology and personality and the rare temperamental exchange, it functions via a set of customs and way of life which has been developed with in a lot of years that make this gives it the status of a more systematic and chivalrous place than its other divisions of Government. Theme Of The Book However, as David M. OBrien explains in his timely and enlightening analysis, starting right from the selection of Justices to their selection of cases to the phraseology of decisions, the High Court is as theme to the political climate as Congress as well as the executive branch. He illustrates it in a such stoical manner, that the power of Americas superior anti-democratic and opposition of majoritarian institution completely depends upon the endorsement or agreement of the country. Even though we think that when it comes to politics, we pay close attention to the elected branches, Alexis de Tocqueville was his common acute as well as observed that hardly any issue which is political take place in the United States that is not determined, ,into a legal question. As Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes stated that the Court turns into what is called a storm centre when it tackles a passion-stirring concern weather it be assimilation, crime, abortion, affirmative action. Storm Center by David M. OBrien gives instance of the above mentioned issues. Given the reality that the Court is an oligarchy and all relies on only 9 lords, each and every one of whom is expected to have strong belief and a powerful persona; it would be astonishing if personal hostility did not take place in the procedures. OBrien in a brilliant manner presents the example of Justice James C. McReynolds, he considers him as being anti-Semitic, would exit from the conference room every time Justice Louis D. Brandeis started to speak . Nevertheless OBrien points out realistically that irrelevant frustration that has no big part in the important decisions. The Justices are restricted via the type of courtesy which is incorporated into the Courts cases (for example they all of them shake hands each others hands before starting a conference) by the gracefulness of its political position as well as by institutional and prudential concern; unpredicted coalition are made on sensitive issues. O’Brien does not give in blow-by-blow accounts of fights -although he gives quite a few good accounts of the cases however he pays more attention to analyzing the structure and operations of the Court. He states that it has turned into common knowledge, that Justices are frequently selected for their apparent ideological likeness to whoever the President is at present , just to let down their sponsor once installed. An well liked example of O’Brien is of president Dwight D. Eisenhowers choice of Chief Justice Earl Warren. (President Reagans consultant clearly knows their record; his most recent recommendation to the Court appears to be diligently proposed in order evade any surprises.) Kind Of Research And Analytic Method OBrien is clear as well as remarkable in the powerful analytic method he uses to explain how the Justices allocate their work. He has used qualitative research as he has utilized pervious literature for the court cases in order to proof his point . this kind of research has led him to give valid information regarding the fact that law clerks have achieved power in current years, as the load of work has increased, although he thinks that their influence is less than that influence which readers of his last publication The Brethren had . Although the importance that he has given to collegiality ever since the time of Chief Justice John Marshall as well as the strong wish for consent, particularly on important issues , foremost decisions have occasionally been bewilderingly scattered in the book . He has used Lower court cases in trying to make sense of a years of case rulings regarding affirmative action, for instance, they currently have their work load cut out. Arguments Made And Defended By The Author His talent can be seen by the way he clearly gives arguments on how when the Justices are able to consent on a controversial issue, they frequently exhibit an understanding of the restrictions of their authority. He defends his arguments by means of examples of pervious court cases the most spectacular example he gave was of Brown v. Board of Education, when a undisputed Court belted the separate but equal schools. This example of his showed clearly how the Justices could notice that the South did not want to any way issue an desegregation, and the Court used a turn of phrase, with all deliberate speed, which was interpreted as meaning slow . A extent of civil harmony was therefore pursued by providing the South a extended time ; by giving this example he wanted to prove that it may years passed before the state was prepared for the other divisions of Government to fabricate a civil rights act that made the 1954 decision an important decision . Another valid argument is By means of the abortion as well as school desegregation decisions, OBrien challenges, the Supreme Court has failed in becoming Hamiltons "least dangerous branch." These decisions have turned into a "storm center" of national politics. aware of our judicial history OBrien also considers Court noticeably more practical. His simple text gives a good explanation of the inner rules as well as procedures the price of filings, procedures related to screening, petitions related to certiorari, the negotiations of the justices on give-and-take basis , their uncertain ballot and scheming, the verbal arguments, the rising amount of opposition and opinions that are highly plurality. O’Brien in extremely simple language explains how Court is full of intense clashes which are personal in nature. This is book is a enlightening, first-rate briefing for people who desire to understand the mechanism of the Court. If you are aware of just a little regarding the Supreme Court, or have ample knowledge , this is an outstanding book to add to that knowledge. It is an superb account regarding a number of the major battles among the Justices themselves moreover it is also an informational text which gives an explanation of the complete workings how a case in reality is resolved by the Court. OBrien recently interviewed the chief justice for a new edition of his book, ``Storm Center: The Supreme Court in American Politics. He had a has exhibited as strong sense of prediction predicted that Rehnquist would preside at the impeachment as impeccably as the lord chancellor of Great Britainbecause of the mark he would leave on history. Since becoming chief justice 12 years ago, OBrien noted, Rehnquist has taken the court ``as far as he can on the issues he is interested in. He mentioned, for example, the chief justices recent opinion for a unanimous court, refusing to give police broad power to conduct searches of people and their vehicles when they ticket them for traffic violations or other minor offenses. The ruling was a rare defeat for law enforcement by a court that has given officers wide latitude to search for evidence. Since taking his seat on the court in 1972, Rehnquist has evolved from the ``all-time lone dissenter, who sported Elvis-length sideburns, to a leading voice on a distinctly conservative court. Conclusion And Findings By The Author OBriens summary is as tempered as the other parts of storm centre : he writes that foremost conflicts in constitutional politics, similar to that of school desegregation, prayer in school and abortion, are decided on as much by means of what is possible in a structure of free government and in a society which is pluralistic as via what the Court state regarding the significance of the Constitution. In fact, David OBrien has asserted that "the Courts docket has grown phenomenally" in the last fifty years. Other scholars writing on this change in the Courts caseload have described it as a "massive increase," a "huge increase," "spectacular growth," and "dramatic growth." Section 2 The author’s methodological approach was extremely useful in explaining the court cases and what the author wanted to explain. As the author used a qualitative research method he could use a lot of past literature regarding cases as supporting information. This also increased the validity of the information used in the book. I believe that the at hour’s fashion of writing was prefect . he does not need to use any other method . He used clear cut legal terms which helped the reader in understating the issue at hand. Apart from this he also used examples of court cases which even the lay man knows about . thus I think that that the book was presented in an prefect fashion and no other fashion could replace it . But a major strong point of his lye sin the fact about the way he clearly and with simple terms explains the appointment of court he states as follows: The appointment of key policy elites, such as federal judges, cabinet officers, and administrative agency heads, provides presidents with additional opportunities to shape equality goals. By means of appointments, federal judges can expand or limit the rights as well as interests of groups which are racial and ethnic in nature by means of constitutional and statutory understanding. It is well-known in the current literature on the appointments of the presidential to the Supreme Court that ideological compatibility exists when taking into account the issue of appointment to the Court (OBrien p 45). Yet still many changes need to be made in the book more can also be taught about the infusion of political attitudes and policy goals into appellate court decisionmaking than appears in this collection. OBrien ought to help students by spending more time in his essays indicating how the judges statements rely on their assumptions about proper allocation of political power in the United States. Finally, he might warn students that all of the judges believe in a core political proposition--adjudication under law is the only legitimate way to order the rights and duties of Americans. In a few places OBrien is quite harsh it seems to slant against the court as according to him the Court has no courage when it comes to confronting the entire nation. It tends to select its ground and its instant sensibly and still it has been seen that it’s decisions are weakened via Congress. Section 3 The Books Contribution To The Study Of Public Law Supreme Court scholars will find OBriens collection a handy reference. It has carefully edited versions of important articles and speeches about constitutional theory by justices of the post-New Deal era, such as Black, Brennan, Thurgood Marshall, OConnor. Rehnquist, and Scalia. It also has a solid bibliography of significant off-the-bench publications by American judges. However, the collection is primarily intended for use in undergraduate classes. Many instructors will find it useful for stimulating critical discussions of constitutional adjudication and normative thinking about the role of courts in U.S. politics. The pedagogic strength of OBriens collection is the statements by U.S. Supreme Court justices about judicial review, the process of Supreme Court decision making, and the standards for interpretation of the Constitution. The selections present contrasting viewpoints on topics such as an suitable method of constitutional interpretation and the utilization of judicial review that can encourage classroom debates on the practice of constitutional interpretation. Other sets of selections address aspects of judicial federalism and statutory interpretation. The selections from articles by federal appellate and district judges and two state supreme court justices focus on censure of judicial selection processes and court administration. Because OBriens selections largely address the issues surrounding the use of judicial power, and only one discusses the trial judges role, this book is not designed for a judicial process class that attends to the everyday practice of managing, negotiating, and deciding the criminal law, family law, and tort cases on the agenda of the vast majority of American judges. Therefore, it is unfortunate that OBriens introductions do not warn students that the empirical reality of U.S. law might differ substantially from that presented by appellate judges. Instructors will also find limitations in the selections. A lot of commentators due to OBrien have noted that our legal tradition includes a judiciary that responds to the constant review of its work by lawyers, law professors, and lower court judges. If true, then careful reasoning and consistency would likely serve the self-interest of any Justice as well as, or better than, obtaining the immediate desired policy outcome of a particular dispute. This seems to be the intuition which informs the most sophisticated versions of the legal model of judicial behavior, which posits that relevant, authoritative texts of OBrien , and a consistent interpretive application of the book storm centre to the dispute before the Court, compel a judges decision . Work Cited OBrien M. David; Storm Center: the Supreme Court in American Politics, Seventh Edition W. W. Norton; 7 edition 2005 p45. Read More