Political Decisions of the Supreme Court

This essay analyzes the decisions of the Supreme Court in the area of political questions and the separation of powers among the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government, as illustrated by selected cases, and examines critically related propositions. Issues of constitutional (and statutory) interpretation must be and have been dealt with by the Court in cases involving political questions. Likewise, practical issues should be but have not always been considered on a consistent basis by the Court in some separation of power cases. The Court has thereby contributed to an erosion of its own moral authority.

Diminished Scope of the Political Question Doctrine

In the broad sense of the term, all decisions by the Court on the allocation and separation of powers among the different branches of government are political in the sense that they address the distribution of political power in the American system of government. Traditionally, the Court has shown a reluctance to intervene in certain areas, such as the conduct by the executive of foreign policy. It has also until recently refrained from intervening in the electoral process on the grounds that to do so would enmesh the federal courts in essentially political questions best left to the electorate and their representatives, the Congress.

In Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952), the Court by a six to three majority held that P

. . .
e challenge to the Tennessee apportionment statute under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment presented a justiciable case. Baker v. Carr in effect sounded something close to a death knell for the political question doctrine, at least in the domestic arena. Balancing Practical Considerations and Constitutional and Statutory Interpretation in Other Separation of Powers Cases Art. I., Sec. 1, cl. 1 says "The executive power shall be vested in the President of the United States." The Court has been somewhat inconsistent in the way it has tended to go about interpreting the Constitution and other statutes in deciding separation of power cases and in balancing those considerations and practical ones. For example, in Bowsher v. Snyder, 478 U.S. 714 (1986), the Court said the implementational role assigned by Congress to the Comptroller General (who is largely subject to the control of Congress) under The Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Act of 1985 was an unconstitutional usurpation of executive functions. Similarly in Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (176), it found that the appointment by Congress of Federal Election Commissioners invaded the President's powers under the appointments clause, Art. II, Sec. 2, cl. 2. Anoth
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
Justice Scalia's, Justice White, Frankfurter Court, Baker Carr, Supreme Court, Mistretta Morrison, Art Sec, Jackson Truman's, Yakus United, Constitution Congress, separation powers, sec 1, art sec 1, art sec, baker carr, political questions, sec 1 cl, decisions court, question doctrine, political question, justice frankfurter, cl 1, 1 cl 1, political question doctrine, 487 654 1988,
Approximate Word count = 1701
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Political Decisions of the Supreme Court