Conservatives had a
tough go 'round at the Supreme Court this term. Obamacare, gay marriage, and questionable disparate impact analyses were all propped up by a divided court, causing prominent pundits to
question the state of the Court, the wisdom of lifetime appointments, and the intentions of Republican-appointed Anthony Kennedy.
The Court, for all its successes and failings, serves as both beacon and barometer for the general population. While lawyers pour over briefs and opinions, and argue about pendulums, most people swallow up on-site media reports and adjust their attitudes according to which justice said what. Mainstream SCOTUS watching, then, has become less of an intellectual exercise, and more of an exercise in pop culture fandom---which has had more of an effect on the Court than you would think.
During a recent interview with NPR, liberal justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg offered some insight into the Court's left wing, and described how her colleagues maximize the impact of their opinions---even when they find themselves in the minority, as they did in the landmark
Bush v. Gore.
Via
NPR:
The time pressure in the [Bush v. Gore] case was excruciating, with the court issuing an opinion just a day after oral arguments, and, as Ginsburg put it, the four liberal members of the court "were unable to get together and write one opinion." Indeed, each wrote a separate dissent, resulting in such confusion that, as she pointed out, some early press accounts erroneously reported that the decision was 7-2, not as it in fact was, 5-4.
After that experience, "we agreed," said Ginsburg, that "when we are in that situation again, let's be in one opinion." It's important, she added, because the public and the lower courts need to know what the court has done or not done. And neither lawyers nor judges will stick with opinions that go on and on.
