Supreme Court: Overturning State Laws Explained

The US Supreme Court plays a critical role in all matters of federal law, but it doesn't always have the final say. The Supreme Court can overturn a state law if it conflicts with a federal statute or the federal Constitution. For example, in Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court stayed the Florida Supreme Court's order of a recount, arguing that it violated the Equal Protection clause of the federal constitution. The Supreme Court can also overturn its own precedents, as it did in 1963 when it invalidated Betts v. Brady (1942) and required state courts to appoint attorneys for defendants who cannot afford them.

Federal courts and state law

The United States has two court systems: federal and state. The US Constitution established the Supreme Court, the only court specifically mentioned in that document. The Constitution gives Congress the authority to create lower courts as necessary. The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the American judicial system and has the power to decide appeals on all cases brought in federal court or those brought in state court but dealing with federal law.

The Supreme Court plays a critical role in all matters of federal law, but it doesn't always have the final say. For example, when the Supreme Court concluded that the Equal Protection Clause prohibits only discrimination by government entities and not private entities, Congress extended non-discrimination to the private sector through its power to regulate commerce.

Federal courts take cases when the issue concerns state laws that may violate the US Constitution. State laws that limit religion, speech, and other fundamental rights are subject to review by the Supreme Court. These laws must pass a type of review called strict scrutiny. When a state attempts to limit a fundamental right, it may do so, but the law must be narrowly tailored to a specific government interest.

Any cause of action advanced at the federal level must have a federal basis, such as federal law, the federal constitution, or general legal principles accepted by the federal courts. A state court decision can be challenged in federal court if a federal basis for the challenge can be given. For example, in Bush v. Gore, Bush argued that the Florida Supreme Court's recount order violated the Equal Protection clause of the federal constitution, and so the order was stayed.

Federal courts, when sitting in diversity jurisdiction, are obligated to follow state law as articulated by state courts, as the Supreme Court ruled in Erie Railroad Company v. Tompkins. If there is no controlling state court precedent, the federal court may "guess" how the state supreme court would have ruled. However, for particularly important issues of law, it is preferable for the federal court to certify the question to the state supreme court instead. Under no circumstances may a federal court second-guess a state supreme court's determination of state law.

Supreme Court interpretations

The US Supreme Court is the country's highest court and plays a critical role in all matters of federal law. However, it doesn't always have the final say. The Supreme Court can review federal law to protect the Constitution and can enjoin the enforcement of unconstitutional laws. For example, if Congress passed a law banning the practice of Islam in the US, the Supreme Court would likely reverse it as a violation of the First Amendment.

A state court decision can be challenged in federal court if a federal basis for the challenge can be given. For instance, in Bush v. Gore, Bush argued that the Florida Supreme Court's recount order violated the Equal Protection Clause of the federal constitution, and the order was stayed.

A federal court may find that a state law conflicts with a federal statute or the federal Constitution, but it may not overrule a state supreme court's determination of state law. Federal courts sitting in diversity jurisdiction are obligated to follow state law as articulated by state courts. If there is no controlling state court precedent, a federal court may predict how the state supreme court would rule, but for important issues, it should certify the question to the state supreme court.

The Library of Congress tracks the historic list of overruled Supreme Court cases in its report, The Constitution Annotated. As of 2020, the court had overruled its own precedents in an estimated 232 cases since 1810. Examples include Katz v. United States (1967), which overturned Olmstead v. United States (1928) and Goldman v., and Atkins v. Virginia (2002), which overturned Penry v. Lynaugh (1989).

Congress can address disagreements with Supreme Court interpretations of statutes. When Congress disagrees with the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution, the direct way to override it is for two-thirds of both houses to propose an amendment, which must then be ratified by three-quarters of the states. This is difficult and hasn't been done in over 30 years. Congress can also achieve its goals without amending the Constitution by enacting statutes that extend constitutional principles through its enumerated powers.

Congress and Supreme Court

The relationship between Congress and the Supreme Court is a complex one, with the ability to check and balance each other's powers. The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country and plays a critical role in matters of federal law, but it does not always have the final say.

Congress can overturn Supreme Court rulings, but it is a challenging process. When the Supreme Court interprets the Constitution, its opinion is generally final. However, when it comes to interpreting federal statutes, Congress has more power to amend and thus can effectively overturn a Supreme Court decision. This was seen in the Stop Corporate Capture Act, which aimed to reinstate the Chevron precedent and address the power of federal agencies in interpreting congressional statutes.

The direct way for Congress to override a Supreme Court interpretation of the Constitution is for two-thirds of both houses of Congress to propose an amendment, which then must be ratified by three-quarters of the states. This is a difficult and rare task. An alternative strategy is for Congress to enact statutes that extend constitutional principles through its enumerated powers, as seen in the case of the Equal Protection Clause, where Congress extended non-discrimination to the private sector.

The Supreme Court's role in reviewing federal law is to protect the Constitution. For example, if Congress passed a law banning the practice of a religion, the Supreme Court could reverse it as a violation of the First Amendment. The Supreme Court can also decide on the constitutionality of state laws, as seen in the case of Roe v. Wade, where the Court overturned its own precedent and ruled that the Constitution does not include the right to abortion.

In summary, while the Supreme Court holds significant power in interpreting the Constitution and federal law, Congress has the ability to check this power through amending statutes and proposing constitutional amendments. The dynamic between the two institutions is an essential aspect of the US political system, allowing for a system of checks and balances.

State court decisions

The US Supreme Court plays a critical role in all matters of federal law, but it doesn't always have the final say. It can overturn state court decisions if they conflict with federal statutes or the US Constitution. For example, in Bush v. Gore, the US Supreme Court stayed the Florida Supreme Court's order of a recount, arguing that it violated the Equal Protection clause of the federal constitution.

However, federal courts are obligated to follow state law as articulated by state courts when sitting in diversity jurisdiction. Under no circumstances may a federal court second-guess a state supreme court's interpretation of state law. This is a well-established principle of federalism, and overturning it would infringe on state sovereignty.

The US Supreme Court can also overturn its own precedents. As of 2020, it had overruled its own precedents in an estimated 232 cases since 1810. For example, in Katz v. United States (1967), the US Supreme Court overturned two prior Supreme Court decisions: Olmstead v. United States (1928) and Goldman v.

State courts have the authority to strike down or rewrite state laws or parts of laws to fix them. This is not a power federal courts have.

Supreme Court precedents

The US Supreme Court can overturn state laws if they conflict with a federal statute or the federal Constitution. However, federal courts are obligated to follow state law as articulated by state courts. If there is no controlling state court precedent, the federal court may predict how the state supreme court would rule, but for important issues, it is preferable to certify the question to the state supreme court.

The Library of Congress has recorded an estimated 232 cases where the Supreme Court has overruled its own precedents since 1810. This includes cases such as:

• Katz v. United States (1967): The court ruled that a man in a phone booth could not be wiretapped by authorities without a warrant, overturning Olmstead v. United States (1928) and Goldman v.
• Atkins v. Virginia (2002): The Supreme Court held that the execution of intellectually challenged criminals was "cruel and unusual punishment" and was barred by the Eighth Amendment, overturning Penry v. Lynaugh (1989).
• Lawrence v. Texas (2003): Justice Anthony M. Kennedy cited the Due Process Clause and invalidated a Texas law that made it a crime for two persons of the same sex to engage in sexual conduct.
• Roe v. Wade (1973): The Supreme Court overturned Roe and Casey in a 6-3 decision, which was based on the right to privacy.

Frequently asked questions