Supreme Court Protection

1718 Words 7 Pages
Prompt 2: The Supreme Court is not an effective, counter-majoritarian protector of the rights of oppressed minority populations in society when fundamental rights are at stake. However, rather than serving as an end-all-be-all and strict law of the land, the court’s decisions have often taken a considerable amount of time to enforce and come into place. Rather than being a protector of the rights, it is wiser to look at the court as an impetus for change. This is not to undermine the extraordinary power that the court has, but instead look at their power from a different angle. In a history of civil and human rights issues and movements, the court has not served as a protector or an enforcer, because of the time it tends to take after their …show more content…
They have the power to interpret laws and their meanings in certain contexts, but after they make a decision, it is not up to them whether or not it is enforced. The enforcers come in the the way of lower level judiciary branches, police forces, and other people who are able to carry out what the Supreme Court has decided would be the law of the land. This is the structure upon which the entire judicial system in the United States is based upon. There are only nine Supreme Court justices, and it would be impossible for those justices to literally be “protectors” of the rights that they deem are inalienable. One’s opinion on the statement is entirely based upon their interpretation of the word “protector” and while the court is able to tell the actual protectors what to protect, they do not say how and it is difficult to regulate how those actual protectors go about their …show more content…
Board and Roe v. Wade had never happened (nor any similar litigation overturning state laws on these issues). It is not a stretch to say that the rights that came out of the respective cases would have eventually been recognized, but there is no way of knowing how long it would have taken our society to change and eventually go through the processes necessary. With any drastic-society changing legislature sure as Brown v. Board and Roe v. Wade., it takes time for people to grow accustomed to the changes and adapt. No matter what, if the country wanted to progress, the growing pains had to happen. There also needed to be an impetus, or some event to spark the change. These two cases served as sparks for the movements that followed, and although the societal transformation was not as smooth as it could have been, they did their job in setting the wheels in

Related Documents