Key takeaways from a jam-packed order list
Since we’re within the coronary heart of opinion season, we thought it might be useful to revisit previous Closer Looks associated to the courtroom’s decision-making course of. A model of this piece was initially revealed on March 16.
During her remarks on the Library of Congress on Thursday, March 12, Justice Amy Coney Barrett make clear a query that generally comes up on Supreme Court opinion days, together with on Feb. 20, when the courtroom launched its tariffs ruling: How does a justice determine when to write down a separate opinion?
The tariffs case raised this query as a result of it included not solely the bulk opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts and the principal dissent by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, but in addition 5 different separate writings. Barrett and Justice Neil Gorsuch, who joined the bulk opinion in full, every wrote a concurring opinion. Justice Elena Kagan wrote an opinion concurring partly and concurring within the judgment, which was joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Jackson wrote his personal solo opinion concurring partly and concurring within the judgment. And though Justice Clarence Thomas (together with Justice Samuel Alito) joined Kavanaugh’s dissent, he additionally wrote his personal solo dissent.
The concurrences and dissents within the tariffs case referred to as to thoughts an earlier period in Supreme Court historical past when separate writings weren’t simply widespread however anticipated. For roughly the primary decade of its existence, the courtroom would resolve instances with severe opinions – that’s, a assortment of separate opinions from the justices, fairly than a single opinion of the courtroom. Once these opinions have been revealed, “the lawyers would have to take into account the justices to try to figure out what propositions of law did the majority support and which propositions were dictum” (not important to the choice and due to this fact not establishing a precedent), according to Justia.
Chief Justice John Marshallwho served from 1801 to 1835, satisfied his colleagues to finish this observe and as an alternative come collectively behind a single opinion of the courtroom. During his Thursday remarks, Barrett mirrored on the importance of this variation, noting that Marshall additionally persuaded his colleagues to forgo all separate writing most often. “Concurrences and dissents were actually quite rare, which I think is part of what enabled him to establish the court’s strength,” Barrett mentioned.
Today, separate writings are comparatively widespread, though the courtroom is nowhere close to a return to the intense strategy. During the 2024-25 termthere have been 50 concurring opinions and 48 dissenting opinions written, along with the 67 opinions of the court.
At the Library of Congress occasion, Barrett was requested by Judge Robert M. Dow., Jr., who’s counselor to the chief justice and who interviewed Barrett on stage, about how she decides when to write down individually. Barrett defined that generally it isn’t her alternative, as a result of probably the most senior justice within the group of dissenters can assign dissents to her. When it is as much as her, Barrett mentioned, she’s going to solely write individually for a few key causes.
“I try not to write [separate opinions] too frequently. I kind of like the way John Marshall said serious opinions are out. “I generally try to just let the majority opinion speak for the court,” she said. “But sometimes I will write a concurrence or my own dissent if I have something that I feel like I should explain, something about my position that I feel like warrants explanation so that it doesn’t look inconsistent. If I don’t join the full opinion,” Barrett continued, “I usually write to say why. And if I feel like I have something to say that would add to the development of the law, something that I hope that lawyers and other courts will think about or that law professors might help us by writing about or doing some research in, that’s the situation in which I will write a concurrence.”
“I try to resist the temptation to write one because I feel like I could have said what the majority said better,” Barrett added.
