After watching the video The Supreme Court of the United States, I have a new respect for the justices and the responsibilities they have to interpret the Constitution and uphold the rules of law. One of the facts I learned is that there are over 7000 cases or petitions per year sent to the Supreme Court and of those only around 100 per year are accepted for consideration. Some of the petitions are written by high priced lawyers and some could be written by prisoners in jail and they all get the same attention and consideration. I believe the most important take-away point is as the video said-the power of the Court is the trust of the American people in the Supreme Court and it upholding the laws of the Constitution. The Supreme Court and the people have an unspoken contract and this is a key to our freedom. If the court ever stopped defending the Constitution or the people ever stopped listening, then our free nation wouldn’t exist.
The most surprising thing I learned is when Justice Thomas answered a question from the interviewer about whether their views about a case change after they hold a conference. Justice Thomas said that he will go into a conference with an outline and views of the cases and he usually does not change his view after the conference discussions. That really surprised me—I thought most would be more open to having conversations and maybe changing their views. I thought he would say we have a back and forth open discussion. It was hard to tell because of the video filming but it looked like some of the other justices were going to say their views do change.
This video changed the way I think of the Supreme Court in a more positive way. First, I see that their job is really difficult and it’s not just simply ruling on a case. The justices have a huge responsibility to review cases that have already been to a lower court and to interpret the Constitution and apply it to their cases. The video also made me understand that when the news reports that the Supreme Court upheld a decision of an earlier case or affirmed a ruling of the lower court it actually may not really mean that. It means that they just decided not to take that case for certiorari and the public is interpreting it that they’re upholding the lower court’s decision. This made me change my thinking that the Supreme Court had re reviewed the case and was agreeing with the first ruling.
