Date: November 9, 2013

Topic: The Supreme Court and Public Opinion

Aim: How does the Supreme Court interact with public opinion?

Do Now: Multiple Choice Questions.

Characteristics of Supreme Court Nominees

Acceptability.Gender.Ideology.Litmus Test –

standing on issues.

Activist v. Restraint.

LINK

MORE LITMUS

How would interest groups impact nominees?

Advertising, lobbying, op/ed pieces.

Talk shows.Lobbying the

Senate.

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation ProcessStage 1: Presidential

Nomination

Stage 2: Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing

Qu ickTime™ an d a

TIFF (Un comp ressed ) d ecomp ressorare n eed ed to see th is p ictu re.

Stage 3: Full Senate Vote

WHITE HOUSEREVIEW

Certification

MEDIAInfluence

FBIInvestigation

Qu ickTime™ an d aTIFF (Un comp ressed ) d ecomp ressorare n eed ed to see th is p ictu re.

INTERESTGROUPInfluence

Stage 4: Oath of Office?

Supreme Court Is Insulated From Public OpinionBrown v Board of Education

(1954)Class Action Suit – why was this a

class action suit? Do you think this was popular

with the American public? Do you think the Supreme Court

was insulated from public opinion?

Yes, the Supreme Court took an activist stance to overrule the Plessy case.

Other Ways the Supreme Court is Insulated.

Supreme Court justices are appointed – they are not elected.

They control their own docket – set their own agenda.

The public has limited access to court proceedings.

Court is in session from early October until late June.

9 – THE NUMBER 9 (NINE)

RULE OF FOUR

Supreme Court – Restrictions that Keep Them From Straying Too Far From Public Opinion

The Litmus Test – where they stand on the issues.

The concern over reputation – credibility and legitimacy of the court.

Justices can be impeached.

Types of OpinionsWhen an opinion is written

(a decision), it often takes months and many drafts. ◦ Majority Opinion – justices

in the majority must draft an opinion setting out the reasons for their decision.

◦ Concurring Opinion – justices who agree for other reasons can give their opinion.

◦ Dissenting Opinion – justices who disagree with the opinion write their side.

... the school's interest in protecting its students from exposure to speech "reasonably regarded as promoting illegal drug use" ... cannot justify disciplining Frederick for his attempt to make an ambiguous statement to a television audience simply because it contained an oblique reference to drugs. The First Amendment demands more, indeed, much more.

“school speech" doctrine should apply because Frederick's speech occurred "at a school event"; second, that the speech was "reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use"; and third, that a principal may legally restrict that speech—based on the three existing First Amendment school speech precedents, other Constitutional jurisprudence relating to schools, and a school's "important—indeed, perhaps compelling interest" in deterring drug use by students.