U.S. Supreme Court Institutional Legitimacy
It is rumored that in reaction to a ruling from the Supreme Court in 1832, President Andrew Jackson stated, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!” This quote highlights a problem with the Supreme Court in which it can neither create nor enforce legislation. Because it has ”no influence over either the sword or the purse,” the Court must rely on its institutional legitimacy to ensure its rulings are respected (Hamilton 1788). There have been cases in which the Court has self-consciously preserved its institutional legitimacy and cases in which the Court went too far from the preferences of the other branches or public opinion that put its institutional legitimacy on the line. …show more content…
v. United States (1935), the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), a key component of Roosevelt 's New Deal program that attempted to stimulate the economy during the Great Depression. The Schechter Poultry Corporation sued the United States because they believed the regulation of the poultry industry was not an power granted by the Constitution. The Supreme Court agreed, ruling that Congress’ use of the Commerce clause, among other things, had no constitutional basis. Although technically correct in its ruling, the Court hurt its legitimacy by taking a very narrow interpretation of the clause. The Court put itself in a dangerous situation because President Roosevelt, Congress, and the public mostly wanted to keep NIRA. As more of the New Deal was ruled unconstitutional, Roosevelt threatened to pack the Court, which made the Court more compliant in the future. Moreover, Congress could have taken more formal actions to influence the Court, such as impeachment, cutting funding, or changing the composition of the Court altogether. The Supreme Court put itself in a very vulnerable position because a formal reprise from Congress, especially one backed by public support, would have struck a serious blow to its legitimacy and
It is rumored that in reaction to a ruling from the Supreme Court in 1832, President Andrew Jackson stated, “John Marshall has made his decision, now let him enforce it!” This quote highlights a problem with the Supreme Court in which it can neither create nor enforce legislation. Because it has ”no influence over either the sword or the purse,” the Court must rely on its institutional legitimacy to ensure its rulings are respected (Hamilton 1788). There have been cases in which the Court has self-consciously preserved its institutional legitimacy and cases in which the Court went too far from the preferences of the other branches or public opinion that put its institutional legitimacy on the line. …show more content…
v. United States (1935), the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), a key component of Roosevelt 's New Deal program that attempted to stimulate the economy during the Great Depression. The Schechter Poultry Corporation sued the United States because they believed the regulation of the poultry industry was not an power granted by the Constitution. The Supreme Court agreed, ruling that Congress’ use of the Commerce clause, among other things, had no constitutional basis. Although technically correct in its ruling, the Court hurt its legitimacy by taking a very narrow interpretation of the clause. The Court put itself in a dangerous situation because President Roosevelt, Congress, and the public mostly wanted to keep NIRA. As more of the New Deal was ruled unconstitutional, Roosevelt threatened to pack the Court, which made the Court more compliant in the future. Moreover, Congress could have taken more formal actions to influence the Court, such as impeachment, cutting funding, or changing the composition of the Court altogether. The Supreme Court put itself in a very vulnerable position because a formal reprise from Congress, especially one backed by public support, would have struck a serious blow to its legitimacy and