Does the Supreme Court Have Too Much Power? (Unit 1)
On June 26th, 2015 the Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage throughout the United States with a vote of 5-4, a decision that has had both positive and negative reception (see NYC Celebration).
Prior to this decision, many states had already legalized same-sex marriage but a few states persisted in their attempts to keep gay marriage illegal. In a case known as Obergefell v. Hodges, a gay couple who resided in Ohio had to travel to Maryland in order to get married and when they returned, the state of Ohio treated them in a manner that the Supreme Court deemed unconstitutional. So unconstitutional in fact, that the Supreme Court decided to legalize same-sex marriage in all 50 states.
I am not here to say whether or not I agree with the Supreme Court's decision, that's a different debate; but what I'm interested to know is: Do you guys (members of AP Gov) feel that the Supreme Court has too much power? Or perhaps too much authority? Should the Judicial Branch be scaled back or is their amount of power appropriate? Thoughts??
I do think that the supreme court has the power to conduct judicial review. However, I think they lack the authority. First, I believe that governmental authority comes from the people. And second, it doesn't explicitly say in the constitution that the supreme court is supposed to have that authority. So if the judges are selected by only the president and other high ranking officials and no official document gives the supreme court that authority then I think that they should give it to them officially or do away with it.
ReplyDeleteIn general, I think the Supreme Court's power is nicely balanced in the government. They are less in touch with the people, but with an executive and legislative branch that is greatly influenced by the wills of the people, having an aloof group of professionals is a good counter to the ignorant masses.
ReplyDeleteNow, having said that, on this particular issue I think they may have overstepped their bounds. (No comment on the morality of the issue, just the politics) On this one issue, it probably would have been better for them to be more in tune with the people. This would have made it take longer for gay marriage to be legalized nationwide, but it would have made it a much calmer transition with less resistance.
Judicial Review has proven an essential check on the power of the other branches, but what I think it comes down to is this: who checks the Judicial branch? Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to check the judicial branch somehow... I suppose an amendment to the constitution could override Judicial Review, but should there be another process to override their decisions and check their power?
ReplyDeleteJudicial Review has proven an essential check on the power of the other branches, but what I think it comes down to is this: who checks the Judicial branch? Perhaps it wouldn't be a bad idea to check the judicial branch somehow... I suppose an amendment to the constitution could override Judicial Review, but should there be another process to override their decisions and check their power?
ReplyDeleteI think that the supreme court has the power also, and the authority too. That doesn't mean that the court is infallible, mistakes can still be made, and then it becomes the people's jobs to reverse the mistake. The ruling of the supreme court that money is speech could be considered one of these. While that ruling has been made, it can still be changed by the people if they will voice their opinions and push for change. So I do believe they have the authority, we gave it to them, but we have the power as a people to change their rulings.
ReplyDelete