The North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 20, Ed. 1 Friday, October 2, 1987 Page: 2 of 6
six pages : ill. ; page 23 x 15 in. Digitized from 35 mm. microfilm.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The North Texas Daily
Page 2 Friday, October 2, 1987
History speaks of Court's
discretion, accomplishments
By Melinda Gann Hall Warren Court between individual rights and state action,
political science faculty By rendering generally more conservative decisions, most
The United States Supreme Court is an important political notably in the areas of criminal defendants' rights and freedom
institution charged with resolving issues that in many instances, of artistic expression, the Court substantially modified the
could not be settled elsewhere in the political system. doctrines of the Warren Court, usually without directly over-
In the cases that reach the Court, the issues are rarely simple turning previous rulings,
or the solutions obvious. Because the Court often must interpret The record of the Burger Court, however, is mixed. Although
highly abstract principles, the Court’s decisions involve an the Court took a substantially more conservative approach to
extraordinary amount of discretion and reflect, to a significant civil liberties than the Warren Court, the Burger Court expanded
extent, the individual political preferences of the justices. rights in areas such as gender equality and privacy.
Recognizing this political reality, recent presidents have been Roe vs. Wade, which applied the right of privacy to abortion
particularly concerned about placing justices on the Court who decisions, is a Burger Court product, along with a number of
reflect the President’s values on those issues most highly salient, other cases supporting, at least in theory, the principles of
The Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice affirmative action.
Earl Warren (1953-69). reflected the justices’ strongly held Today the legitimacy of the Court is endangered. Already
beliefs that rights and liberties were being applied too narrowly Ronald Reagan has elevated William Rchnquist to the Chief
by the states. Justiceship and has appointed Justices O’Connor and Scalia.
It was during this period that the Court demanded an end to The recent retirement of Justice Powell creates a current vacancy,
the practices of state-imposed racial segregation in the South As President Reagan has moved the Court in an even more
and the border states, ordered that state legislatures reflect the conservative direction, the majorities on the Court upholding
“one man, one vote" principle, limited the suppression of civil rights and liberties are smaller
artistic expression be making definitions of obscenity more If the justice appointed to the Court does not respect the
exclusive, and applied the exclusionary rule to protect individuals role of the Court in enforcing freedoms, the [lower to decide
against the abuses in searches and interrogations by the police, these delicate issues will be returned to the states, which in
In essence, what the Warren Court accomplished was the the past were quite willing to limit or ignore basic rights,
nationalization of the Bill of Rights. With each of these decisions. When Americans elected Ronald Reagan to office, they did
the United States moved closer to the ideals of liberty and not endorse radical conservatism or any ideological platform,
justice espoused in the Constitution. By leaving office with a majority of the Court on the extreme
After the appointment of Chief Justice Warren Burger ideological right, Ronald Reagan may well destroy the advances
(1969-86) and Justices Powell, Rehnquist and Blackmun, the made by the Court toward realizing such significant democratic
Court began to adjust the balance that had been struck by the values as equality and justice.
•r* _ V'f / A - ; ' v; •
Outlook
■
The Supreme Court
Supreme Court maintains unequaled
status among world's high courts
“What the court de-
cides as constitutional
or unconstitutional should
“Politicians pay be based on what the
back in one way or framers of the con-
another. This is what I stitution intended. The
feel Reagan is doing liberal Democrats had
for Bork. ” their opportunity to shift
—Dayo Olasope, the court.”
t London, Pnoland —Jame? Feninnsx
“I’d say it’s going
to be a lot more
conservative relative to
capital punishment
and civil rights. It has
a lot of impact over
more than just the term
of the president."
—Tom Massoll,
rtptrnit Mirh
“It’s taking on a
more conservative
image. That’s good in
ways and bad in ways.
I think it’s going to
affect censorship laws.
Rights of privacy will
be affected in a more
conservative fashion. ”
—f^rpn Htrion Tiijvp
“It’s not really going
to move much, looking
out for the good of the
people...as in the
racial issues. I really
hope we’ll get
somebody that will help
the court more. ”
—Keith Spencer,
ncif/.oe inninr
By Joy Jones
Staff Writer
In terms of sheer power, the Supreme Court of the United States is unequalcd in the world
today, Dr. Clovis Morrisson of the political science faculty said Wednesday.
“The power of the Supreme Court is unique in the world. There’s no other court like
it,” Morrisson said. “It has the power to make final and binding decisions on the
constitutionality of acts of government. Other countries have high courts which make decisions,
but their rulings are rarely binding; they can be overturned relatively easily."
Morrisson said the Court’s immense power is such that it can basically tell the President,
the Congress and the state governments what they can and cannot do “Of course, there are
exceptions, but compliance with Court rulings is very high, if not perfect.'
Although constitutional stipulations on the separation of power between the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches of the U S. government theoretically call for equal power
among the divisions, Morrisson said he believes that "as it has evolved over the years, the
Court has become more powerful than the other two branches”
Because Supreme Court justices ate appointed by the president and have lifelong tenure,
questions have been raised about the validity of a democratic system in which the highest
court in the land does not answer directly to the people.
Morrisson said the populace influences the Court indirectly through the election ol presidents,
but the opinions of the people may not show up in Court decisions for years because the Court works so slowly
“The Court reflects election returns, but always out of synch. Statistically, a president who serves for eight years will make 2.8
appointments to the Supreme Court. Reagan has appointed two justices, but his conservative views arc just now . after 6 years, beginning to
be reflected in the decisions of the Court.”
He said presidents usually appoint justices who share their political viewpoints, but the inevitable time lapse means that by the time the
Court starts to sway towards conservativism or liberalism in its decisions, a new president is in power
Often a new president has completely opposite viewpoints from his those of his predecessor. “This creates a perfect recipe for the
president and the Supreme Court always being at odds with each other,’ Morrisson said
He said the precedent system helps to place limits on the Court's power. The Court reviews past rulings, and “if the facts haven’t
changed, the Court has historically been very resistant to changing the law” Morrisson said.
Di. G.L. Seligmann of the history faculty said the Court is limited in its powers because it cannot step outside the boundaries of the
Constitution. “The Court doesn’t so much make the law as shape it. The question of limits really can i be answered, but 1 don’t sec any
overwhelming reason to change the system ‘Better’ is the enemy of 'good enough.’”
Seligmann said the Court has historically made important decisions before public opinions on an issue have crystallized. He cited three
periods in American history when he said the Supreme Court has anticipated trends and acted accordingly.
“Starting around 1801 and continuing through the 1850s, the Court made a whole series of rulings which strengthened national
government and consequently wcakenened state govennent,” Seligmann said.
“During the 1880s the Court starting making rulings which protected and encouraged the nationalization of business. These decisions
effectively supported large interstate commerce and blocked state regulation of business”
In the 1940s and 1950s, the Court made a series of decisions affecting civil rights. The celebrated brown v.v. Board of Education of
Topeka. Kan., ruling made racial segregation illegal and paved the way for further civil rights legislation in the '60s and '70s. “The
court was clearly ahead of the general public in the area of civil rights in a lot of areas, including minority rights, women's rights, and the
rights of prisoners,” Seligmann said.
“In every case, the justices cited constitutional language that supported their decision. Ever since there has been a Supreme Court,
people have been charging that the Court sometimes oversteps its boundaries But the people who say that are usually the ones who’ve lost
a case. Winners never complain.” Seligmann said a case can be “wrongly decided"—based on a weak legal underpinning- and still
be a good decision He cited the landmark Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion "The Roe v.v. Wade case probably wasn't legally
sound, but the Court’s judgment (that state legislatures cannot prohibit first and second trimester abortions) is a good one”
The Roe v.v. Wade case originated in Texas. “If I were a Texas state legislator, I would pray that Roe v.v. Wade docs not get
overturned” Seligmann said. If the decision were to be reversed, the case would return to the state legislature and we would probably see
a very bloody battle.”
‘1 think,,it,.would
be a mistake to-put
him (Bork) on the
Supreme Court. He
goes with the literal
interpretation rather
than the intent. He will
be so rigid it will be
difficult for changes
to take place. ”
—Mary Lou Padilla,
Dallas graduate student
“If Bork is confirmed,
it will be very detri
mental to the womans
movement.” —Tamara
Tuggle, Omaha, Neb.
graduate student
“They don’t need
Bork. He’ll take the
civil rights movement
back 20 years. It’s
going to be ultra-
conservative for a
long time.”
—Candice Wicks,
Dallas junior
“...Reagan’s trying
to pack the court to
maintain his policies
throughout coming
years. He’ll have as
many justices as he
can."
—Jack Ormberget,
Dallas freshman
“What I’ve heard
about Bork isn’t good.
According to his past
record he shouldn’t
be on the Supreme
Court." i
Ji."'1, Thompson,
Dallas junior
/
T
f
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Dowlearn, Laura. The North Texas Daily (Denton, Tex.), Vol. 71, No. 20, Ed. 1 Friday, October 2, 1987, newspaper, October 2, 1987; Denton, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth559703/m1/2/: accessed July 17, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting UNT Libraries Special Collections.