What You Need To Know About SC Cases On Failing to Protect Individual Rights

Introduction

The Supreme Court of the United States is known to be the highest judicial authority in the country and is responsible for interpreting and enforcing the laws of the land. However, in recent years, the Supreme Court has received criticism from activists, legal scholars and even politicians for failing to protect individual rights. This criticism has had a significant impact on both US politics and the legal system, and has raised important questions about the role of the Supreme Court in society.

This article will examine the criticisms leveled against the Supreme Court for failing to protect individual rights and explore the impact of these criticisms on US politics and the legal system. We will also provide ten important facts about the Supreme Court and individual rights to help readers understand the complexities of this issue.

Criticisms Against the Supreme Court for Failing to Protect Individual Rights

There have been several criticisms and concerns against the Supreme Court for failing to protect individual rights. These include:

1. Conservative ideology: Many critics argue that the Supreme Court has become increasingly conservative, favoring the interests of powerful corporations and the wealthy over individual rights. They claim that this conservative bias has led to decisions that have eroded the rights of minorities and vulnerable groups.

2. Narrow interpretation of the Constitution: Critics also argue that the Supreme Court has taken a narrow interpretation of the Constitution, which has limited the scope of individual rights. They claim that this narrow view has allowed the government to trample on basic human rights, such as freedom of speech, privacy, and due process.

3. Partisan politics: There is also concern that the Supreme Court has become too politicized, with Justices being appointed based on their political affiliations rather than their legal expertise. This has led to decisions that are based on political ideology rather than the impartial interpretation of the law.

4. Lack of accountability: Another criticism of the Supreme Court is that it is not sufficiently accountable to the people. Unlike elected officials, Justices are appointed for life and are not subject to the same level of public scrutiny. This lack of accountability has made it difficult for citizens to hold the Court accountable for decisions that are seen to be anti-democratic or unconstitutional.

5. Lack of diversity: Critics point out that the Supreme Court lacks diversity in its composition, with most of its Justices being white men from privileged backgrounds. This lack of diversity has led to decisions that are out of touch with the needs and experiences of marginalized communities.

These criticisms of the Supreme Court for failing to protect individual rights have had a significant impact on US politics and the legal system. In the following section, we will explore how these criticisms have played out in practice.

Impact of Criticisms on US Politics

The criticisms against the Supreme Court for failing to protect individual rights have had a ripple effect on US politics. Here are some of the most important ways in which this has played out:

1. Public opinion: The criticisms of the Supreme Court have increased public distrust of the institution. Polls have shown that fewer Americans have confidence in the Court than in other branches of government. This lack of public trust has led to a questioning of the legitimacy of its decisions.

2. Political activism: The criticisms of the Supreme Court have also inspired political activism. Many groups have organized to protest decisions they see as anti-democratic or against individual rights. This activism has led to increased pressure on politicians to change the law or to appoint Justices who will protect individual rights.

3. Political polarization: The criticisms of the Supreme Court have also contributed to political polarization. The Court has become a partisan issue, with politicians using its decisions as a campaign issue. This has made it hard for consensus to be formed on key legal issues.

Impact of Criticisms on the Legal System

The criticisms of the Supreme Court for failing to protect individual rights have also had an impact on the legal system. Here are some of the most important ways in which this has played out:

1. Lower court decisions: The lower courts have been more willing to take on cases related to individual rights due to the criticisms of the Supreme Court. This has led to a spate of cases that have pushed the boundaries of individual rights.

2. Legislative action: The criticisms of the Supreme Court have also led to increased legislative action to protect individual rights. Politicians have introduced bills in response to decisions that have curtailed individual rights.

3. Interpretation of the law: The criticisms of the Supreme Court have also led to a questioning of the way in which the law is interpreted. Legal scholars and activists are increasingly calling for a more expansive interpretation of the law to protect individual rights.

Ten Important Facts About the Supreme Court and Individual Rights

1. The Supreme Court is made up of nine Justices who are appointed for life by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

2. The Constitution provides a framework for the protection of individual rights, including freedom of speech, religion, and the press, the right to bear arms, the right to a fair trial, and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.

3. Since the Constitution was written, the Supreme Court has interpreted these rights through a series of landmark cases. For example, the case of Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review, which allows the Court to strike down laws that are unconstitutional.

4. The Supreme Court has historically been a conservative institution, particularly on issues related to individual rights. For example, in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, the Court upheld the doctrine of “separate but equal” in the Jim Crow South.

5. However, the Supreme Court has also been responsible for landmark decisions that have expanded individual rights. For example, the case of Brown v. Board of Education overturned Plessy v. Ferguson and paved the way for desegregation in public schools.

6. The Supreme Court has also been instrumental in upholding the rights of the accused. For example, in the case of Miranda v. Arizona, the Court established the right to remain silent and the right to an attorney when being interrogated by the police.

7. In recent years, the Supreme Court has been criticized for taking a narrow view of individual rights, particularly in cases related to campaign finance and affirmative action.

8. There is concern that the conservative majority on the Supreme Court will lead to decisions that erode individual rights, particularly in cases related to abortion, immigration, and LGBTQ rights.

9. The Supreme Court is currently evenly divided between conservatives and liberals, with Chief Justice John Roberts seen as a potential swing vote on key cases.

10. The Supreme Court is a key player in US politics and has the power to shape the course of the nation. The decisions made by the Court have far-reaching consequences for individual rights and the future of democracy in the United States.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court has been criticized for failing to protect individual rights in recent years, with concerns being raised about conservative bias, narrow interpretations of the Constitution, and partisan politics. These criticisms have had a significant impact on both US politics and the legal system, increasing public distrust of the institution and inspiring political activism. While the Supreme Court has historically played a central role in protecting individual rights, the current political climate presents a worrying challenge to the future of democracy in the United States.

The U.S. Constitution contains two Amendments pertaining to individual rights which are left up to the U.S. Supreme Court for interpretation. Both the Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments limit the Federal Government and State governments to infringe upon individual rights and civil liberties of U.S. citizens.

The Ninth Amendment can be interpreted as the guarantee that any rights that have not yet been mentioned or enumerated in the first eight amendments of the Bill of Rights will not be automatically rejected by the Government. The Ninth Amendment stated that the first eight Amendments do not exhaust the full amount of rights of the citizens under Federal law. Supreme Court justices agreed, and subsequent Supreme Court cases held, such as Roe v. Wade, attempted to provide non-enumerated Ninth Amendment rights yet to be mentioned. In Roe v. Wade, the decision was found that the Ninth Amendment granted the right to choose to have an abortion.

Elk v. Wilkins was one of the first highly controversial Supreme Court cases to emerge in the wake of the Fourteenth Amendment. John Elk was born on an Indian reservation, though he renounced his tribe to become a U.S. citizen based on the Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. When Elk attempted to register to vote, he was denied the right to by Charles Wilkins.

Ultimately, the Supreme Court Justices agreed with Wilkins and concluded that the Citizenship Clause did not apply to Native Americans born in the United States. It was not until forty years later that this decision was eliminated through the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which included Native Americans as U.S. citizens.

Further denial to individual rights occurred in the case of boy scouts of America v. Dale, where the Supreme Court overturned a decision by the New Jersey Supreme Court’s assertion of the New Jersey public accommodations law, which forced the Boy Scouts of America to allow Scoutmaster James Dale, a homosexual, to be readmitted into the organization.

The Supreme Court decided that the anti-discrimination law cannot protect a homosexual scoutmaster from becoming a victim of discrimination because the Boy Scouts of America would be sending a message to the youth of the world that the Boy Scouts openly accepted homosexual conduct as “a legitimate form of behavior.” This decision was considered to be a major blow to individual rights for homosexuals.

Another of the important U.S. Supreme Court cases on individual rights was the case of Ferguson v. City of Charleston. In this case, a South Carolina hospital had its policy of testing pregnant mothers for cocaine use and the practice of turning over positive results to law enforcement officials for child abuse prosecutions challenged. Women involved in the case claimed the fourth Amendment

The Supreme Court rejected the arguments against the policies, which many people feel are a blatant violation of civil liberties to privacy. The women eventually appealed this decision in the Fourth Circuit of Appeals and it was affirmed on the basis that the searches were indeed justified, though by a matter of law for non-law-enforcement purposes.