Law and Politics Are Inseparable, SCOTUS at Height of 5-4 Decisions

image
Author: Joseph Avery
Created: 31 Jul, 2013
Updated: 14 Oct, 2022
2 min read

Law and Politics Are Inseparable, SCOTUS At Height of 5-4 Decisions Rena Schild / Shutterstock.com

The Supreme Court of the United States of America, under Chief Justice John Roberts, has had its highest percentage of one vote majority decisions than ever before in the court's history.

The Judicial Branch -- at the top of which is the Supreme Court -- is designed to be the most removed government branch from political leanings. Yet, the influx in court decisions made by a one vote majority have raised questions about political influence affecting the rule of law.

The tides of political opinion are bound to turn, but the Supreme Court has a responsibility to operate above such influences.

David Paul Kuhn: The Atlantic

Law and Politics Are Inseparable, SCOTUS At Height of 5-4 Decisions

The graph above, compiled by David Paul Kuhn for the Atlantic, shows the upward trend in cases decided by a single vote. The court is at its highest level of one vote decisions under Chief Justice Roberts.

Most 5-4 decisions mirror the political makeup of the court, with five Justices (Roberts, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Alito) having been appointed by Republican presidents, and four (Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan) appointed by Democrats.

Not every 5-4 decision is a perfect ideological split. The court's decision on the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was hailed for its 5-4 split not falling under the strict ideological divisions that were expected. Roberts joined the four justices appointed by Democrats, providing the swing vote based on legal and not political justifications.

However, excitement over this departure from the trend shows that it is the exception, not the rule. The amount of 5-4 decisions in an ideologically 5-4 split court suggests the Supreme Court may not exist in the political safe haven it was designed to thrive.

IVP Donate

The design of the Supreme Court, as outlined in Alexander Hamilton’s Federalist Papers, was to shield the justices of political influence. This was achieved through giving justices lifetime tenure, disabling Congress from reducing their salaries, and rejecting legislative veto of court decisions.

Hamilton explained the importance of this separation in stating:

“The complete independence of the courts of justice is peculiarly essential in a limited constitution”“But it is not with a view to infractions of the Constitution only, that the independence of the judges may be an essential safeguard against the effects of occasional ill humors in the society.”

The Political Questions Doctrine is in place to ensure courts avoid encroaching into political territory. The doctrine states that federal courts shall refuse to hear cases which deal with issues that belong solely to the domain of a different branch. However, courts still regularly hear cases that deal with political issues such as abortioncampaign finance, and health care with regards to constitutionality.

The Supreme Court's ideal is to be America’s top nine legal minds working together to determine the will of the constitution. But, the increasing number of decisions that come down to a one person majority shows that law and politics are inseparable.

Latest articles

Image of trade numbers and graph.
As Markets Slide, Polling Shows Independent Voters Are Growing Wary of Economic Direction
The Nasdaq Composite has officially entered bear market territory—defined by a drop of 20% or more from its recent high—while the S&P 500 is nearing the same threshold today. Last week U.S. stock markets shed $6.6 trillion in value over a two-day span, triggered by President Trump’s larger-than-expected tariff announcement and China’s vow to match the tariffs on all American-made goods....
07 Apr, 2025
-
2 min read
Black background with the symbols of the two major parties in the center.
Andrew Yang: Are Democrats Headed for Another Disaster in 2028?
In the latest episode of the Andrew Yang Podcast, formally known as the Forward Podcast, the former presidential candidate and co-founder of the Forward Party sits down with former ABC News White House Correspondent Tara Palmeri to talk about the Wisconsin special election, Elon Musk, and a directionless Democratic Party....
07 Apr, 2025
-
2 min read
hands holding a thermostat.
Millions at Risk of Losing Energy Assistance after HHS Dismantles LIHEAP Oversight
The Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which helps millions of low-income families cover heating and cooling costs, faces serious disruption after the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) laid off all federal staff overseeing the program....
07 Apr, 2025
-
1 min read