Every June, the United States Supreme Court captures national attention as it delivers some of its most significant rulings. These decisions are the result of a meticulous legal process, much of which happens out of public view. This procedure includes strict gatekeeping rules, private conferences, written briefs, oral arguments, and the final announcement of an opinion.
The Agenda-Setting Process
The Supreme Court acts reactively. It waits for cases from individuals, businesses, or governments to reach the court before issuing a ruling. The typical process involves the losing party in a lower court case filing a writ of certiorari, a document explaining why the Supreme Court should review the case.
The winning party in the lower court can oppose this by filing a brief arguing that the prior decision was correct. Interest groups may file amicus curiae or ‘friend of the court’ briefs to emphasize national importance. The court often reviews cases with amicus briefs.
Currently, about 4,000 petitions are submitted per term, with fewer than 80 cases selected. The chance of a case being heard is low, about 2%. To manage this workload, justices rely on law clerks, who are recent law school graduates. They prepare memos recommending whether to grant or deny the petitions.
Most Fridays, the justices hold private conferences discussing these petitions. During these meetings, only the nine justices are present. The rule of four applies; at least four justices must agree to review a case. The court publishes orders granting or denying certiorari. For denied cases, the lower court’s decision stands. Cases granted certiorari proceed to the merits stage.
Legal Briefs and Oral Arguments
The primary method of persuasion for the parties involved in a case is through legal briefs. The petitioner seeks to overturn the lower court’s decision, claiming legal errors. The respondent defends the correctness of the lower court’s decision.
Various groups can file amicus curiae briefs to highlight public policy implications or pursue ideological goals. Recently, there’s been an average of 16 amicus briefs per case. Some high-profile cases like Obergefell v. Hodges saw over 100 briefs.
Oral arguments follow the briefing stage. Typically, each side is allocated 30 minutes. Justices question the attorneys, often indicating their potential votes.
Conference and Votes
Days after oral arguments, justices reconvene to discuss cases and cast preliminary votes. The chief justice speaks first, followed by the others in seniority order. A majority forms, although changes can occur before the final opinion announcement. A justice in the majority drafts the majority opinion.
The chief justice assigns this task if in the majority, or the senior justice does if in the minority. Majority opinions undergo revisions with written feedback from other justices. A justice may switch sides if dissatisfied with the draft.
Justices may also write concurring or dissenting opinions. Concurring opinions offer alternative legal reasoning, while dissenting opinions oppose the case’s outcome and majority reasoning.
Releasing Opinions
The final opinions release occurs from October to June or early July. Major cases often conclude in June. The majority opinion author typically reads a summary. Occasionally, dissenting justices may present their opinions as well, indicating particular dissatisfaction.
On June 29, 2023, Justice Sonia Sotomayor read her dissent in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard College. She criticized the majority for ending affirmative action in admissions, arguing these programs align with the 14th Amendment’s equal racial treatment mandate.
The prominent June rulings arise from a structured process involving thousands of petitions, extensive legal discussions, and internal negotiations. By understanding this, we demystify the court and appreciate how justices influence constitutional meanings and impact millions of American lives.
A free press is vital for democracy. Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.