Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States, the highest court in the United States of America, is the head of the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government.

Composition

The Constitution does not specify the size of the Supreme Court; instead, Congress has the power to fix the number of Justices. Originally, the total number of Justices was set at six. As the country grew geographically, the number of Justices steadily increased. The court was expanded to seven members in 1807, nine in 1837 and ten in 1863. In 1866, however, Congress passed the Judicial Circuits Act, which provided that the next three Justices to retire would not be replaced; thus, the size of the Court would eventually reach seven by attrition. Consequently, one seat was removed in 1866 and a second in 1867. By the Circuit Judges Act of 1869, the number of Justices was again set at nine (the Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices), where it has remained ever since. President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court so that he could add Justices who would favor his New Deal policies; however, the plan failed in Congress. The Constitution provides that Justices "shall hold their Offices during good Behavior"; the term "good behavior" is interpreted to mean life.

Related Topics:
Judicial Circuits Act - Circuit Judges Act - Franklin D. Roosevelt

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The power to appoint Justices belongs to the President. As a general rule, Presidents nominate individuals that broadly share their ideological views. However, Presidents tend to exercise restraint, as nominees with views perceived as extreme may be blocked by the Senate (see below). In many cases, a Justice's decisions may be contrary to what the nominating President anticipated. A famous instance was Chief Justice Earl Warren; President Dwight D. Eisenhower expected him to be a conservative judge, but his decisions are arguably among the most liberal in the Court's history.

Related Topics:
Earl Warren - Dwight D. Eisenhower

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The "advice and consent" of the Senate is required for any Supreme Court appointment. The confirmation process often attracts considerable attention from special interest groups, many of whom lobby senators to confirm or to reject. The Senate Judiciary Committee conducts hearings, questioning nominees to determine their suitability. Thereafter, the whole Senate considers the nomination; a simple majority vote is required to confirm or to reject a nominee. Rejections are relatively uncommon; the Senate has explicitly rejected only twelve Supreme Court nominees in its history. The most recent rejection of a nominee came in 1987, when the Senate refused to confirm Robert Bork. In 1991, Clarence Thomas' nomination was almost derailed by allegations of sexual harassment; however, he was eventually confirmed by a vote of 52–48.

Related Topics:
Advice and consent - Explicitly rejected - Robert Bork - Clarence Thomas

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

In some cases, the Senate may defeat a nominee by failing to take a final vote on him or her, rather than by explicit rejection. For example, the minority may filibuster a nominee, indefinitely prolonging debate and refusing to permit a vote. Furthermore, the President may withdraw a nomination, for instance if he or she feels that the nominee has little chance of being confirmed. Most recently, President Ronald Reagan withdrew Douglas H. Ginsburg's nomination in 1987 after Ginsburg admitted to having used marijuana. While filibuster of a Supreme Court Justice may be an option to bar his nomination, only one Supreme Court Justice nomination has been filibustered, Abe Fortas.

Related Topics:
Defeat a nominee - Filibuster - Ronald Reagan - Douglas H. Ginsburg - Marijuana - Abe Fortas

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Up until the 1980s, the approval process of Justices was frequently rather quick. From Truman through Nixon, Justices were typically approved in a month. From Reagan through Clinton, the duration of the approval process extended to nearly a full year. Some speculate this is because of the increasing political role Justices play.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

When the Senate is in recess, the President is constitutionally authorized to make a temporary appointment without the Senate's advice and consent. A recess appointee to the Supreme Court holds office not for life, but only until the end of the next Senate session (at most approximately two years). In order to continue to serve thereafter, the nominee must be confirmed by the Senate. In the history of the Supreme Court, two Chief Justices and six Associate Justices have received recess appointments. They were all subsequently confirmed for full terms with the exception of Chief Justice John Rutledge.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

A Supreme Court Justice (except if appointed during a Senate recess) serves during "good behavior," or, in other words, for life. However, Justices may resign, retire into senior status, or be removed by impeachment and conviction (the last has never occurred). On average, a vacancy arises every two years; however, long stretches without any vacancies occur from time to time. For instance, no vacancy arose after Stephen Breyer's appointment in 1994 until Sandra Day O'Connor's announcement of her retirement from the Court in 2005—a period of eleven years. The Supreme Court's jurisprudence is often evaluated with respect to the service of a particular Chief Justice. Thus, for example, the Court between 1969 and 1986 is referred to as the "Burger Court" (after former Chief Justice Warren E. Burger) and the Court between 1986 and 2005 is referred to as the "Rehnquist Court" (after the late Chief Justice William Rehnquist).

Related Topics:
Senior status - Stephen Breyer - Sandra Day O'Connor - Warren E. Burger - William Rehnquist

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~