Essay Sample on Supreme Court: Influenced by Political Ideologies, Limited Autonomy

Introduction

The Supreme Court in the USA has shifted from its core mandate of deciding on the appealed cases from the Federal Courts matters because it is under the influence of dominant political ideas. The Court has limited powers to operate as an independent judicial institution due to the dominating political ideologies of the time. The trends in case proceedings and rulings have shown decision-making that base on the political situation. The Supreme Court has underscored its powers to decide independently; an indication of how political dominance shapes the Court's decisions. The Supreme Court is also under the direction of the ruling political system leading to less focus in attending to legal matters from the Federal Court. As seen in the discussion of this essay, the decisions made by the Supreme Court are under the influence of dominant political ideologies of the time; therefore, for justice in the USA, there is a need for ensuring that the Supreme Court operates as an independent institution from politics.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

First, the basis for the operation of the Supreme Court under the influence of a dominant political idea is in the manner of nominating and approving at the Justices of the court. The constitution is behind the underscoring of the Supreme Court to face the influence of dominating politicians by giving the president powers to nominate candidates for Justice Positions. According to Article 2 of the constitution, the president is mandated to nominate Justice of the Supreme Court (Sharma et al. 269). The power of the president to appoint Justice affects the independence working of the Supreme Court. The President has some powers to influence the decisions made by the court. As a result, rulings made by the Supreme Court will strive to promote the presidential positions concerning some legal matters or appealed cases (OpenStax 9). The influence leads to having a higher court that is not independent, but the one that is under the control the dominant political ideas.

After the nomination of candidates by the president, the Senate has the task of approving nominees for the position of the Supreme Court Justice. The approval process further renders the Court at the mercies of the dominating political ideologies (Sharma et al. 269). The approval of Justice does not entirely base on the nominees' qualifications, but it relies on the political standing of the candidate. The nomination of Justice becomes a highly politicized process leading to having the Supreme Court Justice that has support from the dominating political side of the government. Once in the offices, the decisions made by Justice begin to occur under a high influence of the dominating political ideas. The outcome is rulings that favor the opinions of the president as a way of protecting their jobs. The president can interfere with the judgments of the Supreme Court by making a replacement of a Justice (OpenStax 11). Therefore, since the nominations and approvals of justice positions are highly politicized, the influence of the dominant political ideas in the Supreme Court is inevitable.

The other defense for the fact that the Supreme Court is not an independent institution, but it is under the influence of popular political opinions concerns having insufficient power to enforce its ruling. The success of the Supreme Courts protection of civil rights and liberties relies on the position of popular political side (Sharma et al. 270). The result is a Court that is not able to enforce its ruling. The Supreme Court starts to rule in favor of the dominating political ideologies to gain support in the process of imposing its judgment. The decisions made by the Supreme Court take a political shift because enforcement of judgments relies on the help of the Congress and the President (OpenStax 10). Therefore, the Supreme Court cannot provide effective justice or social change. Since the court cannot impose its ruling or push for social reforms, it engages popular politicians to get support for enforcing decisions made.

Another argument defending the fact that the Supreme Court is not independent but is it is under the influence of dominating political ideas concerns the outcome of rulings on major cases that have political interferences. The decisions of critical cases such as the Voting Rights Act, Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), as well as Arizona anti-immigration law have shown how dominant political ideologies influence the rulings by the Supreme Court (Sharma et al. 270). Politics pushes the development and decisions of these cases for political gain, a situation that renders the Supreme Court powerless in safeguarding the liberties and rights of people. Every dominating political system comes with a program to push the law for successful political planning. For instance, the Affordable Care Act which became law in 2010, had objections from different groups and individuals, but the Supreme Court ruled in its defense (OpenStax 9). In spite of the controversies in the Affordable Care Act, the ruling of the case was under the influence of President Obama. The president used his political position to cause the Supreme Court decision in favor of his political ideology of having widened healthcare coverage to more citizens while safeguarding the holders of the health insurance policy to gain support from the minority groups and investors in the health insurance sector.

Besides, the view of the Supreme Court as an institution working under the influence of the dominating political ideas regards the failure of the Court in addressing critical issues based on public opinions. The court is not adequately addressing the views of the public on significant issues or constitutional matters that require support from the highest judicial decision (OpenStax 6). The changes in the critical issues brought on board by the public such as civil rights and abortion have taken a political shift where popular political governance influences both the ruling and enforcement. The public opinions receive less support from the Supreme Court because American politics have made the judicial system as a platform for planning current and future political environment in favor of the dominating political leadership. In essence, politics have underscored the power and position of the Supreme Court in addressing matters concerned with public opinion. Instead of interpreting the constitution in making changes on important issues affecting the public, the Supreme Court takes a political inclination because of the position of politics in the judicial system. As a result, the rights and liberties of citizens have no priority in the Supreme Court, but rather the Court focuses on streamlining the ideologies of dominating politics of the time. Some scholars have termed the Supreme Court as a "hollow hope" for the Americans where the people's expectations of having their opinions addressed and rights or liberties safeguarded, the benefit flows towards the popular political ideologies (Sharma et al. 275).

In spite of the evidence supporting that fact that Supreme is not an independent institution because it operates under the influence of the dominant political parties, there are some notions that the Court is independent of politics. Though the framers of the Supreme Court aimed at having a highest legal structure that is independent of political influence, along the line politics have gained a position to influence the decisions made by the Court (OpenStax 6). The denial of the fact that that Supreme Court is independent has a basis on the efforts of the Court in regulating power between the State and Federal government. The Supreme Court has spearheaded the power-sharing between the two governments for peaceful and stable governance. To some extent, the Supreme Court has sown its independence from politics by regulating the economy as well as resolving conflicting interests between the government, private sector, and the public. Though with limited enforcement capability, the Supreme Court has protected civil rights and liberties through mechanisms like extending the Bill of Rights to the State level (Sharma et al. 279). Concerning addressing public opinions, the Supreme Court has had had debates and conversations on sensitive matters such as same-sex marriage. Arguably, the Supreme Court is to some extent a politically independent institution.

Conclusion

Conclusively, from the argument above it is evident the Supreme Court is not an independent body, but it operates under the influence of a dominant political ideals of the time. First, the basis for the operation of the Supreme Court under the influence of a dominant political idea is in the manner of nominating the Justices of the court where the President nominates. After the nomination of candidates by the president, the Senate has the task of approving nominees for the position of the Supreme Court Justice. The other defense for the fact that the Supreme Court is not an independent institution, but it is under the influence of popular political opinions concerns having insufficient power to enforce its ruling. Another argument defending the fact that the Supreme Court is not independent but is it is under the influence of dominating political ideas concerns the outcome of rulings on major cases that have political interferences. Besides, the view of the Supreme Court as an institution working under the influence of the dominating political ideas regards the failure of the Court in addressing critical issues based on public opinions. Though the Supreme Court has tried to operate independently of politics, the influence from the dominant political ideas is evident and inevitable.

Works Cited

OpenStax. "Openstax". Openstax.Org, 2019, https://openstax.org/details/american-government.

Sharma, Hemant, and Colin Glennon. "A Case For Supreme Court Term Limits? The Changing Ideological Relationship Between Appointing Presidents And Supreme Court Justices". Politics & Policy, vol 41, no. 2, 2016, pp. 267-297. Wiley, doi:10.1111/polp.12015.