Taking Back Our Stolen History
Supreme Court of the United States
Supreme Court of the United States

Supreme Court of the United States

(SCOTUS) is the highest court of the judiciary of the United States of America. Alexander Hamilton originally described the federal judiciary as the “least dangerous branch” due to the fact that it does not have the power to enforce its rulings, or control the country’s finances.[2] However, due to liberal tendencies the Supreme Court has grabbed so much power in the last half-century that it currently exceeds the authority of the other branches of government. The Supreme Court hears and decides fewer and fewer cases: 150 per year in the mid-1900s, to only 80-90 cases in 1990s and 2000s, to only 60-70 around 2020, and then only 50-60 cases in 2022.[3]

“If the … president doesn’t place morally sound Christians on the bench of our highest court of this land, we might as well look for a new country to raise our children in. The Reagan and George H. Bush administrations failed us when they nominated “moderates” to the bench and the Clinton administration further disappointed us with the nomination of Judge Ginsburg. The … presidential administration will determine the path the United States will take. Will it be path of light, or further darkness?” — Anthony A. Falzarano

Starting in 1791, the Supreme Court met in the Old City Hall building in Philadelphia. The size of the court was set at nine in the Judiciary Act of 1869. Between 1800 and 1935, it met primarily in the basement of the United States Capitol building, then in the Old Senate Chamber, until it moved into its present location at One First Street NE, Washington, D.C.

The Constitution does not specify the number of Justices on the Court. The Judiciary Act of 1869 set the number at the current nine, consisting of eight Associate Justices and one Chief Justice. To assist them there are many clerks, guards, and staff. Historians generally divide Court history into eras named after the Chief Justice then presiding (e.g., the Rehnquist Court and the Warren Court).

Justices are appointed by the U.S. President with the advice and approval of the U.S. Senate, which means that confirmation by a vote of a simple majority of the Senate is required before one can be sworn in as a Justice of the Supreme Court. There is no requirement that, whenever The Chief Justice’s seat is vacant, that the nominee be a member of the Court, though it is common.

A list of pending cases to be heard on their merits by the Supreme Court, also known as petitions for which certiorari has been granted, is available on its website.

With the exception of a few cases (mainly involving disputes between states) where the Court has original jurisdiction, a party to a case from a lower court (either a Federal appellate court, or a state supreme court if the party is arguing that a United States Constitutional right was violated) must request the court to grant a writ of certiorari to hear the case.

The Court grants the writ in only about one out of every 100 petitions filed with it each year. And when granted, not all cases result in an actual court hearing: the court may grant the writ in a case similar to one where the Court did render an opinion, but then instead of a hearing will remand (return to the lower court) the case to reconsider its decision in light of the Court’s opinion in the similar case (this is common if the opinion was rendered either during a term of the Court or the immediately preceding prior term).

When a case is heard, the Court hears the cases en banc (as opposed to lower level courts where a panel may hear the case). Time limits are very strict, usually only one hour (divided between the parties) is granted (though, in some exceptional cases, extra time may be granted) and the parties are frequently interrupted by a Justice asking a question or making a comment (though notably, Justice Clarence Thomas had a long period where he didn’t ask a question from the bench).

Prior to the Marshall Court, the Court issued opinions in seriatim. This means that each Justice wrote his own opinion and delivered it from the bench. Currently, the Court issues one opinion, said to be “the opinion of the Court”. Opinions tend to have the history of the case, followed by the Court’s reasoning and action. Generally the opinion will be written by a member of the majority, chosen by either the Chief Justice or the most senior Justice in the majority.

When a majority of Justices agrees to the opinion, it is called the majority opinion. Occasionally, a majority of Justices agrees to the remedy, yet a minority of Justices agrees with the main opinion. This is called a plurality opinion.

Justices that disagree with the Court’s action can and frequently do write dissenting opinions, which state their objections to the ruling. When a Justice agrees with an action, but not the reasoning behind it, he may write a concurring opinion, which states the reasoning he would have used. Such opinions have no bearing on the case at bar, but are often used later in time as justification for legal rulings.

Current members

NameDate of AccessionAppointed byTitleGeneral ideology
Clarence ThomasOctober 23, 1991George H. W. BushAssociate Justiceconservative
Stephen BreyerAugust 3, 1994Bill ClintonAssociate Justiceliberal
John RobertsSeptember 29, 2005George W. BushChief Justicemoderate/liberal
Samuel AlitoJanuary 31, 2006George W. BushAssociate Justiceconservative
Sonia SotomayorAugust 6, 2009Barack ObamaAssociate Justiceliberal
Elena KaganAugust 7, 2010Barack ObamaAssociate Justiceliberal
Neil GorsuchApril 10, 2017Donald TrumpAssociate Justiceconservative
Brett KavanaughOctober 6, 2018Donald TrumpAssociate Justiceconservative
Amy Coney BarrettOctober 26, 2020Donald TrumpAssociate Justiceconservative

Source: Conservapedia

Chronological History of Events Related to SCOTUS

Truman Authorizes the Seizure of United States Steel Mills

Truman Authorizes the Seizure of United States Steel Mills

On June 24, 1950, North Korea invaded South Korea. The United Nations Council called on all U.N. members to help repel the invasion. Under his authority as commander in chief of the armed forces, President Harry S. Truman ordered American troops to help defend the beleaguered South Koreans. Believing that the Korean War would end quickly, Truman did not ask Congress for a formal declaration of ...
The 22nd Amendment is Ratified

The 22nd Amendment is Ratified

The 22nd amendment to the United States Constitution limits the number of times a person is eligible for election to the office of President of the United States to two, and sets additional eligibility conditions for presidents who succeed to the unexpired terms of their predecessors.[1] Congress approved the Twenty-second Amendment on March 21, 1947, and submitted it to the state legislatures for ratification. That process was completed on February 27, 1951, when ...
Everson v. Board of Education: Landmark SCOTUS Decision Applying the Establishment Clause in the Bill of Rights to State Law Effecting the Separation of Church and State

Everson v. Board of Education: Landmark SCOTUS Decision Applying the Establishment Clause in the Bill of Rights to State Law Effecting the Separation of Church and State

Everson v. Board of Education, was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court which applied the Establishment Clause in the country's Bill of Rights to State law effecting a separation of Church and State. The Founders intended the First Amendment words, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" to guard against the state giving preferential treatment to one religious establishment over another so everyone could worship as they pleased, however they ...
Helvering v. Davis Upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court Eviscerating the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution

Helvering v. Davis Upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court Eviscerating the Tenth Amendment of the Constitution

Helvering v. Davis, 301 U.S. 619 (1937), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that Social Security was constitutionally permissible as an exercise of the federal power to spend for the general welfare, and did not contravene the 10th Amendment. The Court's 7–2 decision defended the constitutionality of the Social Security Act of 1935, requiring only that welfare spending be for the common benefit as distinguished ...
FDR announces “court-packing” plan

FDR announces “court-packing” plan

On February 5, 1937, President Franklin Roosevelt announces a plan to expand the Supreme Court to as many as 15 judges, allegedly to make it more efficient. Critics immediately charged that Roosevelt was trying to “pack” the court and thus neutralize Supreme Court justices hostile to his New Deal. READ MORE: How FDR Tried to Pack the Supreme Court During the previous two years, the high court had struck down several key ...
FDR and Democrats Attempt to Pack the Supreme Court

FDR and Democrats Attempt to Pack the Supreme Court

On November 3, 1936, the 32nd president won a smashing reelection victory, defeating Republican challenger Alf Landon by more than 24 points in the popular vote, carrying 46 of 48 states; it was the biggest electoral landslide since 1820. In addition, FDR had long “coattails” to help down-ballot candidates; when the 75th Congress convened in January 1937, Democrats boasted a whopping 333 seats in the House and ...
Buck v. Bell: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Compulsory Sterilization of the Unfit

Buck v. Bell: Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Compulsory Sterilization of the Unfit

One of the worst Supreme Court rulings in history. In the 1927 case Buck v. Bell, the court upheld a statute that enabled the state of Virginia to sterilize so-called mental defectives or imbeciles. The person in question was Carrie Buck, a poor, young woman then confined in the Virginia State Colony for Epileptics and the Feebleminded, though she was neither epileptic nor mentally disabled (only ...
The US Supreme Court Ruled in Pierce v. Society of Sisters that States could not Compel Children to Attend Public Schools. "The Child is Not the Mere Creature of the State"

The US Supreme Court Ruled in Pierce v. Society of Sisters that States could not Compel Children to Attend Public Schools. “The Child is Not the Mere Creature of the State”

Pierce v. Society of Sisters, the U.S. Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a 1922 Oregon law that compelled children aged eight to sixteen to attend not just a school, but the public schools. The Oregon compulsory public education law was sponsored by the Ku Klux Klan, Federated Patriotic Societies, the Masons, and smaller groups that appealed to white supremacist, anti-Catholic, anti-Semitic, and nativist beliefs. Drawing on popular ...
Jacobson v. Massachusetts, SCOTUS Upheld the Authority of States to Enforce Compulsory Vaccination Laws (Individual Liberty < Police Power of the State)

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, SCOTUS Upheld the Authority of States to Enforce Compulsory Vaccination Laws (Individual Liberty < Police Power of the State)

Massachusetts was one of only 11 states that had compulsory vaccination laws. Massachusetts law empowered the board of health of individual cities and towns to enforce mandatory, free vaccinations for adults over the age of 21 if the municipality determined it was necessary for the public health or safety of the community. Adults who refused were subject to a $5 monetary fine. In 1902, faced with an ...
Martial Law, a Frame-Up Attempt, Kidnapping, and Murder Result from an Idaho Mining Building Bombing

Martial Law, a Frame-Up Attempt, Kidnapping, and Murder Result from an Idaho Mining Building Bombing

The Idaho murder trial: Labor unites to defeat a frame-up It began with the bombing of a building. The explosion led to a hunt for terrorists. Men were seized without warrants, transported long distances, and placed in solitary confinement. Those judicial kidnappings were defended by the Supreme Court. But the events did not originate from the mountains of Afghanistan (or anywhere in the Middle East); they ...