The Supreme Court’s rulings and even the behavior of some justices are highly controversial. What is a deeper issue is the debate over interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. Allegedly, there is a “originalist” way to interpret the Constitution. What the Founding Fathers intended. A quick read on what actually happened back at the founding sure shows the same level of intense and acrimonious debate we’re experiencing now. They didn’t agree with each other. They just compromised to get a working constitution in place so that the new nation could govern itself. That founding document established enough functionality to get a new nation started. One that would govern itself without a king. A rather new concept at that time.
Our legal system has evolved — like a species — over not just years or decades, but over nearly 2 1/2 centuries of SCOTUS Opinions. Each Opinion captures a resolution in that moment of the debate over what was “at issue” before the court.
Finding balance between competing political and economic forces is the biggest challenge facing our democracy and is an objective of this blog. So the SCOTUS is on this blog’s radar.
The balance between civil rights and responsibilities wasn’t as big an issue at our nation’s founding as it is now. There was less need for a Bill of Responsibilities back in the 18th century as individuals were expected to be responsible. Who else would feed their families or provide a roof over their heads? Debtors’ prison awaited those who didn’t pay their debts.
We’ve come a long way since that time, periodically revisiting our collective, evolving social contract through challenges, debate, and unrest. The concept of civic responsibility, however, is no longer an unwritten assumption in our behavior. Being uncivil never resolved a conflict. Choice of language can create power.
That said, acting responsibly starts with being informed. I’ve realized how little I know of our nation’s history. It’s also plain to me that the two dominant, radicalized political parties are not serving the best interests of the wide swath of voters stuck in the middle. We might lean one way or another, but we are more moderate and pragmatic than theoretical in our politics.
This post serves to help others quickly and easily find the original resource materials to read and learn about the SCOTUS. I propose that these Opinions reflect the intellectual legal muscle involved in the debate of each era. They capture in their “legalese” the step-by-step evolutionary process as society wrestled with its issues of that moment in time and as the SCOTUS built yet another cell in the body of our legal foundation. A written Opinion archive so publicly available facilitates the debate. The reasoning behind any single decision is laid out in great detail.
MAJOR SUPREME COURT OPINIONS
First, the U.S. Supreme Court’s site.
Second. How the SCOTUS organizes its Opinions: The official internet version of Supreme Court decisions includes the Opinion for the majority, the dissenting Opinion if any, and other concurring Opinions.
The American Bar Association provides useful guidance on how to read a Supreme Court Opinion.
Each Opinion starts with background. Scroll down to the title. It tells which Justice wrote the decision’s Opinion.
Here is the link to the Opinion site on the Supreme Court site. Note that the year is the “Session” — when it began. The recent Opinions (published in June and July of 2024) were cases brought in the 2023 Session.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/21
Finally, here are some of the key Opinions. Campaign finance. Reproductive rights. Social media censorship. Restraining federal agencies. Presidential immunity. Written in legalese, but it is real life, not reality TV. Take a squint at one that is of interest to you. This is just a resource, not a reading list.
Citizens United v Federal Election Commission (January 2010) LINK:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZO.html
Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores (June 2014) LINK:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/13-354
Roe v Wade (1973). It isn’t available on the Supreme Court opinion site due to its age. Here is the full opinion on another site. LINK:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1562778/posts
Planned Parenthood v Casey (1992) LINK:
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/505/833/case.pdf
Brown v Board of Education (1954) LINK:
https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/brown-v-board-of-education
Trump v United States (2024) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-939_e2pg.pdf
Moody v NetChoice (2024) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-277new_8mjp.pdf
Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo (2024) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-451_7m58.pdf
Ohio v Environmental Protection Agency (2024) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23a349new_h3ci.pdf
Federal Drug Administration v Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine (2024) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/602us1r35_bqmd.pdf
Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health (2022) LINK:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/597us1r58_gebh.pdf
You may have your own cases of interest. If not found on the Supreme Court site due to their age, many universities maintain Supreme Court original Opinions.
TO NAVIGATE BACK TO THE HOME PAGE: TAP ON THE FANCY TITLE AT THE TOP OF THIS POST. CATEGORIES CAN BE FOUND THERE, ON THE RIGHT.