I write this on the way to a rally at the steps of the Supreme Court.
And yes, I understand that lawsuits against the White House rate as more newsworthy than lawsuits against the Supreme Court.
The ultimate arbiter in the case will be the state Supreme Court—if it decides to take the case at all.
The big differences I'd expect to see are on Supreme Court justices, and to a lesser extent, on implementing ObamaCare.
Waldman is not cynically suggesting that the Supreme Court is a slave to public opinion.
There was a Supreme Court, but it had no power to hold the balance between the states and the central government.
Only this morning you were my Supreme Court of justice; there was no appeal from your verdict.
The judicial power is vested in a Supreme Court of Justice and in all the other tribunals which may be established by law.
He held the position of judge of the Supreme Court until 1864, when he resigned.
The Supreme Court has legislated as truly, and perhaps more effectively than Congress.
A federal court; the highest body in the judicial branch. The Supreme Court is composed of a chief justice and eight associate justices, all of whom are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. (See photo, next page.) They serve on the Court as long as they choose, subject only to impeachment. Each state also has a supreme court; these courts are all courts of appeals, primarily hearing cases that have already been tried. The federal Supreme Court (“the” Supreme Court) has the final word on interpretation of all laws and of the Constitution itself.
Note: Supreme Court decisions have a significant impact on public policy and are often extremely controversial. In interpreting the Constitution, the justices of the Supreme Court occasionally have deduced legal doctrines that are not clearly stated (or stated at all) in the Constitution. For example, in the famous case of McCulloch versus Maryland (1819), Chief Justice John Marshall advanced the opinion, accepted by the Court, that the Constitution implicitly gives the federal government the power to establish a national bank, even though such a power is not explicitly granted by the Constitution. Similarly, in Roe versus Wade (1973), the Court ruled that state laws restricting abortion violate the right of privacy.
Note: The McCulloch and Roe decisions illustrate the principle of broad construction (interpretation) of the Constitution. The opposite is narrow construction. Those who favor broad construction, or judicial activism, believe that the spirit of the times, the values of the justices, and the needs of the nation may legitimately influence the way justices decide cases. In contrast, narrow constructionists insist that the Court should be bound by the exact words of the Constitution or by the intentions of the framers of the Constitution or by some combination of both. This view is sometimes called judicial restraint.