Reflection on the US Supreme Court

Before watching Part I and Part II of the Supreme Court video, I had a pretty general understanding of how the Supreme Court worked, but I didn’t realize just how selective the justices are when choosing cases. They receive thousands of petitions, but they only hear a small fraction. 

Another thing that stuck with me was the justices’ tradition of shaking hands before every conference and argument. In my opinion, this simple gesture reinforces the idea that even though the justices may not agree ideologically, they can put those differences aside and be committed to working together. 

Another thing I found interesting was the way oral arguments are presented. They are basically just a conversation among the justices, with the attorneys acting as mediators.

If I could take one thing from the video, I would choose the fact that the Supreme Court's power isn't just about "enforcing" laws and determining whether or not the government acted in an unconstitutional manner. The job of the Supreme Court depends on public trust. For example, Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas (1954) was originally a 5-4 decision in favor of upholding "separate but equal." 

When Chief Justice Vinson died, and Governor Earl Warren (of CA) became the new Chief Justice, the composition of the court shifted. He convinced the justices that they needed this ruling to be unanimous because the American citizens would not have any faith in the Court, and they would lose their effectiveness. 

This is just one example of why the Supreme Court relies on public trust.

One of the things that I found most surprising from the video is how collaborative the process of writing opinions is. I always figured that once the justices ruled, one person wrote and published the opinion. But in fact, several drafts happen before we, the public, see the opinion. 

As drafts are passed around, justices sometimes change their votes. The fact that they collaborate this much amazes me, and it furthers my point that it is great that they shake hands at the beginning of deliberations because they work together more than I imagined. 

As pictured to the left, three of the nine current Supreme Court justices were appointed by Democratic presidents, and the remaining six justices were nominated by Republican presidents. Even though there are clear ideological differences, which can be seen in their opinions and rulings, they are still able to deliberate together without problem.  

Before I watched the videos, I viewed the Supreme Court as a very formal place—just nine justices in their black robes making decisions. However, the videos opened my eyes to them as individuals, each bringing their own unique personalities and perspectives to the law. 

Watching how they interact, engage in debates, and grapple with tough choices really deepened my appreciation for the human side of judicial decision-making. It also helped me understand how the Court skillfully balances tradition and stability while navigating new constitutional challenges as our society evolves.