This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
This Honorable Court: Inside the Marble Temple. A look atthe Supreme Court of the United States.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Mail clerk pushing cart loaded high with law books down hallway.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Justice Byron White reading a draft opinion.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Law clerk walking down hallway of Supreme Court.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Justice John Paul Stevens seated at desk, reviewing an opinion.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Law clerks at work.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Male law clerk at computer terminal.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Chief Justice William Rehnquist seated outdoors on a patio, saying that Justices supervise clerks in drafting opinions very closely. (People say the clerks do the first draft of opinions) it sounds like a very sweeping original type of assignment. It s not at all. It s an assignment to do something in accordance with conference deliberations and the instructions of a Justice who was there. It is not telling the clerk, just figure out how you d like to decide this case and write something about it. It s not that at all.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
A page with book cart in hallway at the Supreme Court offices.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Law clerks typing at computers in a Justice's chambers, zoom in to computer screen.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Justice Lewis Powell discussing dissenting opinions, as a check on the Majority, to keep majority true to Constitution. First of all, they influence the majority opinion. In a loose use of words, they keep the majority honest so far as the Constitution is concerned. What that really means is you know when you write an opinion for the Court and you know that there will be a strong dissent, you anticipate what the dissent will say. And you therefore have to make a judgment whether its arguments are going to be viewed as stronger than yours.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Justice Antonin Scalia discussing value of dissenting opinions. It also serves the function of pointing out the weaknesses of the decision so that the decision, even if it won t be reversed in later cases. And you rarely reverse decisions that involve statutory interpretation. If a statute s been interpreted the general rule is leave it alone. A Constitutional question is more likely to be reconsidered. But even in those cases where you re not likely to reverse it, in the future, you at least warn off future Courts in extending the logic of that opinion. You show that it has frailty and shouldn t be expanded.
This Honorable Court: The United States Supreme Court
Justice William Brennan discusses his dissent opinions. I dissent in every death penalty case. I dissent in every 11th Amendment case. Because I have the hope, indeed maybe a bit of confidence that the day may come when those dissents will have the influence to determine whether the death penalty is Constitutional.