The courts are an essential piece of the American political system created by the Framers of the Constitution, despite the fact that the Framers originally considered the judicial branch to be the “least dangerous branch” of government because it lacked the power “of the sword and of the purse” (Hamilton 1778). However, the Supreme Court has proved itself to be a powerful political actor with the capability to make a profound impact on policy when conditions are ripe for it to do so. Nearly all of the major social and political issues of the modern era have found their way into the Court, and the justices have had the ability to make both constitutional and statutory rulings that have impacted policy framework of policy within the United States.
…show more content…
First, interest groups become disillusioned or frustrated with the legislative process, and turn to the courts to argue and promote their cause. Subsequently, the issue at hand makes its way through the court system until the Supreme Court makes a final pronouncement on the issue. Next there is pushback against this decision, which might take the form of Congressional action, non-compliance on the part of the states, or even counter-litigation. This period of pushback usually serves to draw a great deal more attention to the issue. Ultimately, the courts will then hand down decision that continue to affirm the initial ruling, and the Supreme Court will rule again if necessary, until the issue is resolved one way or another. While not all successful social policy has followed this pattern precisely, most of the areas in which the Court has been able to successfully create policy have all followed some variation of this …show more content…
Thus, through the action of interest groups, the Court was able to enter into the process of shaping policy on this issue, and lay the groundwork for the implementation of such policies. Several subsequent and important decisions such as Cooper v. Aaron (1958) further helped to shape policy in the direction of desegregation. However, the advocacy of interest groups alone was necessary, but not sufficient for the successful creation of the Civil Rights policy of the 1950s; it was also necessary that the second condition be met in order for the policy to prove
First, interest groups become disillusioned or frustrated with the legislative process, and turn to the courts to argue and promote their cause. Subsequently, the issue at hand makes its way through the court system until the Supreme Court makes a final pronouncement on the issue. Next there is pushback against this decision, which might take the form of Congressional action, non-compliance on the part of the states, or even counter-litigation. This period of pushback usually serves to draw a great deal more attention to the issue. Ultimately, the courts will then hand down decision that continue to affirm the initial ruling, and the Supreme Court will rule again if necessary, until the issue is resolved one way or another. While not all successful social policy has followed this pattern precisely, most of the areas in which the Court has been able to successfully create policy have all followed some variation of this …show more content…
Thus, through the action of interest groups, the Court was able to enter into the process of shaping policy on this issue, and lay the groundwork for the implementation of such policies. Several subsequent and important decisions such as Cooper v. Aaron (1958) further helped to shape policy in the direction of desegregation. However, the advocacy of interest groups alone was necessary, but not sufficient for the successful creation of the Civil Rights policy of the 1950s; it was also necessary that the second condition be met in order for the policy to prove