Mechanics of reinstating previously overturned rulings
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:41:46 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Discussion
  Constitution and Law (Moderator: World politics is up Schmitt creek)
  Mechanics of reinstating previously overturned rulings
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Mechanics of reinstating previously overturned rulings  (Read 295 times)
TML
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: June 25, 2022, 08:59:06 PM »

A few years ago, a study conducted by Vanderbilt University indicated that if 18-year term limits were implemented for Supreme Court justices shortly after Roe v. Wade in 1973, the subsequent judicial appointments would probably result in Roe being overturned in 1987, reinstated in 2009, and then overturned again in 2017. What are the mechanics of reinstating previously overturned decisions, if they exist? Are there any SC rulings in history which actually reinstated rulings that had been previously overturned?
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: June 25, 2022, 09:08:18 PM »

Justice Brennan had a line about the Court's internal mechanics that's worth remembering in moments like the present.
Logged
MarkD
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,132
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: June 26, 2022, 02:06:08 PM »
« Edited: June 26, 2022, 05:14:04 PM by MarkD »

I don't know what you mean about "mechanics." The only thing it takes for the Court to make any particular decision is for there to be a case in which a litigant asks the Court to render that decision.

I know of one example in which the Court overturned its precedent on a particular issue twice, with the third decision reinstating the first one. The issue was whether the federal government can impose its minimum wage law on state and local governments. In 1968 (Maryland v. Wirtz), the Court said yes, the Commerce Clause does permit the federal government to force state and local governments to pay the federal minimum wage. Eight years later, the Court reversed (National League of Cities v. Usery (1976)) and said that the Commerce Clause does not allow the feds to do that. Then nine years after that (Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority (1985)), the Court reversed itself again and concluded that the Commerce Clause does allow it.
Logged
TML
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,402


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: June 26, 2022, 11:24:23 PM »

^So if I were to apply your reasoning to the hypothetical judicial timeline mentioned in the study above, would the result be something like:

-A 1987 ruling stating that there's no constitutional right to abortions;
-A 2009 ruling stating that abortion is protected by the constitution;
-A 2017 ruling again stating the lack of a constitutional right to abortions.

?
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.022 seconds with 11 queries.