Evaluate the role of the Supreme Court in protecting the rights and liberties of UScitizens. (30 marks)
The Supreme Court’s powers of judicial review enable it to declare the action of either a federalor state official unconstitutional. Furthermore, it can declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.For those proponents of limited government, the Supreme Court protects the citizen from thestate.
The Bill of Rights contains the essential rights that US citizens enjoy. Later amendments (suchas 14 and 15) extend these rights further. Candidates will be able to cite a number of caseswhich might illustrate the way in which the Supreme Court has upheld these rights.The following are indicative examples; others could be used. It could be argued that theSupreme Court is effective in protecting these rights. The freedom of expression as outlined inthe First Amendment was protected by the Supreme Court in 1989 in the Texas vs Johnsoncase, which determined that the prohibitions on desecrating the US flag, which were in place inall but two of the US states, were contrary to the freedom of expression. The decision of theSupreme Court to uphold the due process clause of the US Constitution in the Roe vs Wade ruling of 1973, effectively barred state legislators such as Texas from preventing women fromhaving abortions. Pro-life groups argue that the rights of the unborn child are not protected as aresult of the Supreme Court’s decision in this case. In the case of District of Columbia vs Hellerin 2008, the Supreme Court upheld the right of US citizens to own guns in a landmark ruling,interpreting the Second Amendment of the US Constitution.
In order to achieve high marks, candidates should be able to evaluate the chosen case(s).They should explain why the Supreme Court does not protect the civil rights and liberties of UScitizens. Arguments might include the following: Supreme Court decisions might be seen touphold one right but not another. The case of Citizens United vs Federal Election Commissionupholds the right of commercial organisations to pay for political advertising, as freedom ofexpression (Amendment 1). It might be argued that such advertising could adversely affectpolitical parties that have fewer or no connections with big business and that essentially this willbe a default help to the Republican Party. It could be argued that freedom of speech dependson the depth of one’s pockets.
Some amendments to the US Constitution which sought to protect the rights of citizens werenever properly upheld by the Supreme Court. The 15th Amendment on ensuring all races hadthe vote was effectively violated by many (mainly) southern states, which introduced their ownrestrictions (such as literacy) on voter eligibility. Voter registration procedures came underscrutiny in Florida in 2000, when African American activists claimed that many black citizensfound it difficult to register to vote.
The decision of the Court in the Bush vs Gore case in 2000 outraged many citizens becausethey believed that the Court had effectively denied the rights of Americans to a fair electionresult because of a narrow interpretation of whether a re-count of votes in the state of Floridashould be allowed to proceed.
Finally, the Court cannot contradict the Constitution and its amendments, no matter howperverse they may be. The 18th Amendment, prohibiting the sale and consumption of alcohol,would be seen in most western, liberal societies as an affront to individual civil liberties. In theUnited States it was not seen as such because it was, for a time, part of the Constitution.