Although the left has predictably responded with outrage, public opin- ion rests squarely on the side of the majority in believing that merit — not race — should not be the leading factor in college admissions; that forced speech is inherently un-Amer- ican; and that college graduates should pay their own debts. Prior to its series of victories in 2023, one of the Court’s most notable deci- sions came on June 24, 2022, when a 5-4 majority overturned Roe v. Wade in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization . In a historic victory for unborn children, the rule of law, and judicial independence, Dobbs declared that there is no constitu- tional right to abortion, returning the issue to the people and their elected representatives in the state legisla- tures and Congress. In another major conservative victory last year, the Court ruled last summer in Kennedy v. Bremerton School District that a public high school football coach has a right to pray on the field after games — a significant rebuke of the left’s longstanding efforts to expel faith from the Amer- ican public square. “Respect for reli- gious expressions is indispensable to life in a free and diverse Repub- lic,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority. In Carson v. Makin , another conser- vative legal win, the Court ruled that funds from Maine’s state tuition assistance program could be allo- cated to secondary schools that provide religious instruction — a triumph for First Amendment protec-
pendence of the Court from the other branches of government and the Court’s role as an interpreter of the law. As then-Chief Justice John Marshall wrote for the majority, “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” Dred Scott , the Warren Court, and the Birth of ‘Living Constitutionalism’ Unfortunately, it did not take long for the Court to drift away from its consti- tutionally prescribed role. In one of the most egregious examples of judi- cial overreach in American history, under Chief Justice Roger Taney, the Court ruled in the notorious Dred Scott decision that black Americans were ineligible for US citizenship and the rights it entailed. In addition to being immoral, Dred Scott was an unconstitutional attempt to maintain social and polit- ical harmony. Though it was later nullified by the ratification of the 13th and 14th Amendments, the decision left a devastating mark on American jurisprudence. Over the course of the next century left-wing activism gained new life with the ascendancy of progressive President Woodrow Wilson and a few decades later with the 1953 appoint- ment of Earl Warren as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Warren saw himself not as a guardian of the Constitution or objective inter- preter of the law, but as a social activ- ist tasked with moving the country
tions, religious freedom, and school choice proponents. In 2022, the Court also issued a staunch defense of Second Amend- ment freedoms in New York Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen . Here, the justices ruled that Americans have a constitutional right to carry guns for self-defense outside the home, invali- dating a New York law that prevented citizens from doing so absent a “proper cause.” “The exercise of other constitutional rights does not require individuals to demonstrate to government offi- cers some special need. The Second Amendment right to carry arms in public for self-defense is no differ- ent,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority. To understand how historic the Court’s past few terms have been, it’s helpful to look back at the history of the Court and how we got to this moment.
History and Purpose: The “Least Dangerous Branch”
America’s Founding Fathers saw the Supreme Court as essential to the survival of the rule of law. Described by Alexander Hamilton as “the least dangerous branch” of government, the framers hoped that the Court would interpret the Constitution neither through “force nor will,” but instead through “judgment.” One of the Court’s earliest and most consequential decisions, Marbury v. Madison , reaffirmed both the inde-
Image description continuted - Seated from left: Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Associate Justice Clarence Thomas, Chief Justice John Roberts, Associate Justice Samuel Alito Jr., and Associate Justice Elena Kagan. Standing from left: Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch, Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and Associate Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Volume 17 Issue 4 • 11
Powered by FlippingBook