ipl-logo

How To Interpret Supreme Court Decisions

556 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Analyse the view that the supreme court has too much power

Lincoln believed that if the Court made a decision in error, that “They will withdraw the mistaken statement, and reconsider the conclusion based upon it.” COOPER REWORK ELIMINATE Brennan asserted the importance of the Court declaring, “We Justices are certainly aware that we are not final because we are infallible; we know that we are infallible only because we are final.” Lincoln argued every citizen needed to question constitutional issues and Supreme Court decisions. Brennan indicated that many people lacked the ability to interpret the Constitution; therefore, he asserted that it was the duty of the Supreme Court to interpret it for the advancement of all society. If we fail to question the validity of these decisions then we are empowering the Court to usurp powers not guaranteed by the Constitution itself. Brennan maintained, “judicial power resides in the authority to give meaning to the Constitution, the debate is really a debate about how to read the text, about constraints on what is legitimate interpretation.” For Lincoln it was the duty of all citizens to interpret the Constitution that right should not be reserved for the select few members of the Supreme Court. …show more content…

He declared when “a Justice perceives an interpretation of the text to have departed so far from its essential meaning, that Justice is bound, by a larger constitutional duty to the community, to expose the departure and point toward a different path.” Lincoln would refute Brennan’s claim that the Justices could simply ignore precedent. FIND A LINCOLN QUOTE TO SUPPORT Although there were several instances that Lincoln believed the Supreme Court had erred in their judgment, he maintained that those decisions must be followed until they can be repealed or amended. Lincoln would never advocate for blatant disregard of the

Show More
Related
181 Words | 1 Pages

Justice William Brennan and Attorney General Edwin Meese held different views on the interpretation of the Constitution when it came to ruling in a case. Brennan held the view that judicial review should be done constitutionally, but to keep human dignity in mind when ruling in a case. Brennan makes his opinion on the matter known saying, “The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights solemnly committed the United States to be a country where the dignity and rights of all persons were equal before all authority.” (Brennan). Unlike Brennan, Meese believed in sticking strictly to what the constitution stated for most matters.

Read More
362 Words | 2 Pages

In William Brennan’s view on the American Constitution he focused on human dignity to determine his interpretation. As he states in his essay, “But we are an aspiring people, a people with faith in progress. Our amended Constitution is the lodestar for our aspirations. Like every text worth reading, it is not crystalline.” (Brennan).

Read More
1541 Words | 7 Pages

Textualism, as Antonin Scalia describes it, is inconsistent in its nature. While he first claims that a good textualist would never interpret the law with the legislator’s intent in mind, Scalia later violates his own convictions by allowing for corrections of Scrivener’s errors. In principle, correcting Scrivener’s errors requires the judge to think about what the original writer meant to say with the statute, not the literal meaning of the text. This may mean adding a single additional word to the statute, but something as deceptively simple as one word could have drastic effects on the meaning of the law. Therefore, Scalia cannot claim to account for Scrivener’s errors while also chastising methods of interpretation that consider what the

Read More
439 Words | 2 Pages

Lincoln went on to say in his address: “Let every American, every lover of liberty, every well-wisher to his posterity swear by the blood of the Revolution never to violate in the least particular the laws of the country, and never to tolerate their violation by others”. Abraham Lincoln may not have addressed the Declaration of Independence in his Lyceum Address but in referring to the laws and to the U.S. Constitution, he explains that without following these laws the Declaration of Independence was for nothing and means

Read More
465 Words | 2 Pages

President Lincoln had to make the best decision for the country, even if he did not satisfy the interests of both groups. Presidents should not appeal to majorities nor minorities, but overall, make the best decision for the country as seen with George Washington, as well as Abraham Lincoln. Each knew what was best in the end and that is what made him a great leader. If the government continues to apply filters of consent, prevent majority factions, and let the president make their own verdicts for the country, we will all be better

Read More
65 Words | 1 Pages

I disagree that the “Living Constitution” will destroy it because society changes and the laws that govern it need to change also. I think that Scalia was stuck in an outdated mindset of viewing the constitution. I agree with you that Breyer 's argument was the better of the two, and I agree that the interpretation of the constitution should be flexible and not be fixed.

Read More
1101 Words | 5 Pages

These words must be interpreted reasonably; the words should have “an expansive rather than a narrow interpretation—though not an interpretation that the language will not bear” (Scalia, 37). LO improves on ST in two main ways. First, Scalia does not give a good response to the Dead Hand Objection. Scalia’s argument for why the Constitution is legitimate and is the supreme law is likely because it says so, in Article VII and Article IV, respectively. Though, that still raises the question for why a group of dead, unrepresentative framers had the authority to make a supreme law.

Read More
194 Words | 1 Pages

Prior to the reading of both essays of Supreme Court Justice William Brennan and Attorney General Edwin Meese my personal opinion was to interpret the constitution as best fitting for the current situation, whatever that may be. Post reading that opinion that I held changed. After reading these essays I realized that it is more important to stick as closely to what the framers of the constitution meant as possible. As stated in Meese’s essay, “Any true approach to constitutional interpretation must respect the document in all its parts and be faithful to the Constitution in its entirety.

Read More
2265 Words | 10 Pages

He touches on his previous idea of separating himself from the government, stating that he has a solemn oath to protect it, while maintaining that the government is not the enemy and will not be the aggressor. Even the themes in the last paragraph harken back to an earlier time of unity and enforce Lincolns claim as the embodiment of the founders vision. The mystic chords of memory are remarkably similar to Madison’s many cords of affection the connect all American’s together, and the structure of the argument is nearly identical (Hubbel, 1931, p. 551). It’s with this final plea that Lincoln finishes his speech, and can only hope that it was enough to prevent a catastrophic loss of

Read More
349 Words | 2 Pages

According to the celebration of the Constitution Day, I have been able to hear the debate between Professor Ralph A. Rossum and Professor Bruce Allen Murphy about Scalia: The Jurisprudence and Legacy of an Originalist. Professor Rossum came first and talked about the composition in Constitution, some cases happening during recent years, and the ideas of Scalia. About the Constitution, he illustrates that law was not permanent, it involves documents relating to time. By discussing the significance of tax, structure, and historical analyses of establishing the Constitution, Scalia’s idea shows up that Justice will make their own mistakes based on their laws. Majority opinions cannot always be conceivable due to the jury.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

Read More
606 Words | 3 Pages

Lincoln goes all the way back to the Founding Father’s own legislative records to counteract Douglas’s assertion that

Read More
1279 Words | 6 Pages

(The concurrence was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Anthony Kennedy.) Scalia argued that the majority’s analysis of text and legislative history subverted Bowen’s [CITE] clear statement rule of retroactivity and transformed the rule into a “discernible legislative intent” rule. [CITE.] Justice Scalia also took issue with the Court’s understanding of retroactivity and the substance-or-procedure distinction that was critical to its vested rights analysis.

Read More
458 Words | 2 Pages

On the other hand the judicial review has become too powerful. This power has allowed for the constitution to be changed in terms of its meaning without physically changing on the document. This was the case when the supreme court judges what is to be considered ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment under the 8th amendment, and this could reinforce the judgment that the 8th amendment and the constitution in general doesn’t work affectively and no longer applies to modern America. Nonetheless the simple fact remains that the current constitution has survived over 200 years and continues to serve its purpose to an extent affectively, after surviving two world wars, a civil war, riots and civil disorders.

Read More
738 Words | 3 Pages

Judicial Review credibility is product of consistency in applying the principles and the predictability that comes from it. “If the courts are merely enforcing the Constitution as the Framers intended, then the legitimacy problems should be directed at the Constitution itself, not the judicial messengers” (Wilkinson, pg. 45). The great amount of acceptance really comes from the fact that the majority if not everyone understands and agrees on the importance of using the original text of the Constitution for

Read More

More about How To Interpret Supreme Court Decisions

Related Topics

Open Document