Judicial Review

Ayers v. Belmontes (12-13-06)

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined.

Ayers v. Belmontes (12-13-06)

KENNEDY, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and SCALIA, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. SCALIA, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which THOMAS, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ., joined.

Randall v. Sorrell (6-26-06)

BREYER, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., joined, and in which ALITO, J., joined as to all but Parts II–B–1 and II–B–2. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SCALIA, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined, and in which STEVENS, J., joined as to Parts II and III.

Randall v. Sorrell (6-26-06)

BREYER, J., announced the judgment of the Court and delivered an opinion, in which ROBERTS, C. J., joined, and in which ALITO, J., joined as to all but Parts II–B–1 and II–B–2. ALITO, J., filed an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment. KENNEDY, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. THOMAS, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment, in which SCALIA, J., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion. SOUTER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG, J., joined, and in which STEVENS, J., joined as to Parts II and III.

Opinions

Describe History of Case Describe “Precedent”

– Stare decisis– Reason by analogy

Holding– Becomes precedent– Weight depends on majority v. plurality

Examples

What Matters

Not Just Who Wins / Who Loses REASONING

Focus on Judicial Review

What Is It? Marbury v. Madison (1803)

– Judiciary Act of 1789

John Marshall’s Judicial Review: Assumptions– The Constitution is best reflection of popular will– The Court can apply the law objectively

Interpreting the Constitution

Strict Construction– Problems?

Original Intent– Problems?

Living Constitution– Problems?

Factors in JudicialDecision-making

Factors– Law / precedent / stare decisis– Attitudes / ideology– Roll theory– Small group theory– Legal socialization

What Does This Mean for Judicial Review?