Episode 2

Back to the Basics: The Supreme Court

In our second episode we explore the Supreme Court's powers and influence in American policy and life. From defining what the court can rule on, highlighting two cases that changed educational spaces, and explaining the impact of understanding SCOTUS, we've got it all. Join us as we break the Court down to the basics!

Published on December 17, 2023. Hosted by Carys Sherer.

Episode Transcript

(Music)


CARYS: Welcome back or welcome to The Next Voter, a platform dedicated to helping youth be the change. I’m your host Carys Sherer, the founder and executive contributor for The Next Voter. As always I’m glad to have you join me today as we explore the powers and limitations of the Supreme Court.

Every year seems to be riddled with a handful of controversial Court rulings; this year cases like Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard and 303 Creative LLC v. Elenis. Naturally these rulings sparked heated debates, with the side who feels cheated typically arguing the Supreme Court has abused its power. But, what exactly are the limits to the Supreme Court’s power? Are they truly out of line, or, much like the president, is much of it left to the interpretation of Congress? We’ll be answering these questions and more in today's episode by first breaking down and explaining the origins, official powers, and limitations of the court; and then diving into a few key Court cases and how their rulings showcase the impact of the Court in law and our everyday lives. Now enough of the formalities and welcome to Back to the Basics: The Supreme Court. 


(Music)


CARYS: To understand the Supreme Court, or SCOTUS, we have to go back in time nearly 235 years ago to 1789 when Article III of the Constitution was written. Now Article III, Section I states, “The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." You’ll notice that this simply states a Supreme Court shall be created and later details give some framework for what this Court is actually supposed to look like, but doesn’t really create firm guidelines on what that court could do. The bulk of SCOTUS’s development was left to the whims of Congress.  

However, Article III, Section II did establish SCOTUS’s legal jurisdiction, or what cases they could and couldn’t hear in court. The Court could have original jurisdiction, or have cases first tried before them (meaning no other Court has heard the case before), over cases between two or more states and those involving ambassadors and other public ministers. However, the Court rarely sees these kinds of cases and is often known as the “last resort court.” This is due to the broader appellate jurisdiction granted to SCOTUS. Which sounds super fancy but really is just cases on appeal: a lower court already ruled on a case, but someone involved wants a higher level court to review the lower court’s decision. It’s sort of like your older sibling telling you you’re not allowed to borrow their clothes, so then you go ask your mom if you could borrow their clothes. Now I know it’s an oversimplification, but the principle is the same. You're appealing to a higher ranked authority, your mom, because the lower ranked one, your older sibling, gave you an unfavorable verdict. 

Now the Court can hear appeals for almost any case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law. The idea that SCOTUS can determine the constitutionality of rulings, actions, and laws dates all the way back to 1803, when Chief Justice John Marshall and his court’s decision on Marbury v. Madison established the precedent of judicial review. Judicial review being the Court’s ability to rule something as unconstitutional or constitutional, whether directly or indirectly through their ruling - we’ll look at some examples of this in action later in today’s episode.

Finally, we cannot talk about the court without discussing the justices themselves: the limits, powers, and role. As of December 16, 2023 there are nine Supreme Court justices including; Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justices: Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. However, there weren't always nine justices. From 1789 to 1807 there were six justices. In 1807 they added a seventh justice. 1837 saw the addition of the eighth and ninth seats before the addition of the tenth seat in 1863. In 1866 Congress allowed for a gradual decline in the number of justices to seven. Then in 1869 new legislation brought the total back to nine. Clearly that whirlwind of dates showcases that the number of seats is up to the discretion of Congress, a fact that sparks debate even today. 

However, as most are aware thanks to widely publicized votes and swearing in, the actual justices themselves are also at the discretion of Congress. Of course, the president is the one who nominates members of the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, and there is power vested into being the executive deciding who’s being considered. But, ultimately it takes a simple majority from a Senate vote for confirmation. Once appointed justices maintain their position for life, or until retirement or impeachment. And while a justice retiring is nothing, new impeachments certainly turn heads. Impeachments of justices require a vote by both the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. There’s only been one case of a justice being impeached: Samuel Chase way back in 1804 and the Senate acquitted him. Ironically he was impeached on the grounds that his political partisanship was affecting his rulings. 

Here lies what many view as a massive issue with the Supreme Court, its partisanship. Since nominations are left to the discretion of the president, the political ideology of said president tends to be in line with the judicial ruling of the nominated judge. Hence the current court’s “conservative supermajority.” Six of the nine justices tend to have strict interpretations of the constitution and maintain more conservative views. I will not pretend to agree with all the beliefs held by the conservative bloc, but I will openly state I do not support an overtly progressive court either. SCOTUS at its core is meant to be the highest of the American judicial system. Justice itself is described to be impartial, and while our systems may not be perfect, we should never stop striving for the impartiality the government has been battling to create and maintain since the days of Washington’s presidency. That’s why it’s crucial we understand the basics of the court, so our opinions can shape our own rulings in the form of our elected officials. If you have the right to vote you have a means to use your voice to shape our systems. Since Congress and the President collectively decide so much of who and what the court is, if you seek change to the court, vote for individuals you believe will fight for that change.  You can be the change through your vote and voice.


(Music)


CARYS: Now we’ll shift a little bit and focus on two specific cases, the Court’s rulings, and how those rulings impact us today, especially as youth.


(Music)


CARYS: First up, Tinker v. Des Moines which handles students’ rights within school. In the midst of social unrest over the Vietnam War, American youth were organizing across the nation. Des Moines was not immune to these movements. In December of 1965, 13-year-old Mary Beth Tinker and a small group of other junior high students decided to wear black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. The protest was silent and peaceful in nature as the students did nothing out of the ordinary except wear the armbands. When the principal saw he warned the students’ to remove the armband or face suspension. The students refused and continued to wear armbands. Once the school board found out they placed a preemptive ban and Mary Beth, along with four other students, were suspended from school. They were told they could not return to class unless they agreed to remove the armbands for good. After the holiday break the students returned without their armbands, but wore black clothing for the rest of the year in protest. In response to the suspension their parents sued the school district for violating their children’s First Amendment rights.

What followed was a four-year court battle that ultimately led the case all the way up to the Supreme Court. In a landmark 7-2 ruling the Court found that students do not “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” Consequently school districts and officials from across the country had no legal ground to censor student speech unless it violated the educational purposes or environment of the schools. The armbands had no effect on classroom efficiency and as such were now seen as a protected, constitutional right to free expression. As youth, many of us students ourselves, the impact of Tinker v. Des Moines can still be seen today. It’s what protects your right to wear pins, shirts, and armbands that display rhetoric that supports certain groups like LGBTQ+ rights and may criticize others such as certain political groups or figures. The ruling ensures that student voices are not silenced because they simply disagree with what school officials think. It showcases that American schools, and American youth, are entitled to the same rights as everyone else. Never be afraid to use your young voice to make an impact. 

The second, and final, case we’ll discuss today is more well-known, Brown v. The Board of Education of Topeka. In 1896, SCOTUS’s ruling on Plessy v. Ferguson allowed for legal segregation of public facilities as long as White and Colored facilities were equal in quality. This ruling was foundational for further discriminatory legislation that is now known collectively as Jim Crow laws. Jim Crow laws dominated the South for more than 5 decades before the National Association for the Advancement of People of Color worked to challenge these laws and the Civil Rights movement was at the forefront of pushing for social change. In 1951, Oliver Brown sued the Board of Education in Topeka, Kansas after his daughter Linda Brown was denied entry into the district’s all-white elementary schools. Brown claimed that the “separate but equal” policy was not present in schools as white schools were far better in quality than those for colored students. He argued that the equal protection clause within the 14th Amendment was being violated by segregation within schools. 

Brown v. The Board of Education was one in a collection of five lawsuits in a combined effort to push back against segregation in schools by suing districts in Kansas, South Carolina, Delaware, Virginia, and District of Columbia. However, it was the case who found itself in front of the Supreme Court. In a historic 9-0 ruling the Supreme Court found that segregation within public schools violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. The ruling only found that segregation was unconstitutional in public schools, but as I mentioned earlier SCOTUS decisions can also have power in what they imply. Despite only ruling on public schools the decision implied that segregation in all public facilities was a violation of the Constitution. Therefore Brown v. The Board of Education was fundamental for the advancement of colored people throughout America, especially Black Americans, and continues to stand as a beacon of legal precedent denouncing discriminatory practices. 


(Music)


CARYS: And that’s where we’ll leave it for today’s episode! Thank you for tuning in as we broke the Supreme Court down to the basics. As always I encourage everyone to continue with their own research. If you want to learn more about landmark Supreme Court cases and their impact on American policy and society be sure to look for next week’s blog where we’ll discuss specific cases in greater detail. You’ll be able to find the blog, today’s episode’s transcript, and much more on our website www.thenextvoter.org. For more updates be sure to follow our Instagram @thenextvoter. Want to be featured in an upcoming episode or share your hot take in a blog, or simply have comments and suggestions? Message us on LinkedIn or email us at thenextvoter@gmail.com. 

Be sure to be the change and, much like SCOTUS, weigh in on the rulings that define tomorrow. Till next time! Bye! 

Resources Used for this Episode