Contrary to popular belief, Article 3 of the Constitution provides a sparse blueprint for the federal judiciary. It establishes "one Supreme Court" but delegates the creation of lower courts and even the Supreme Court's size to congressional legislation, making the judiciary's structure far more flexible than assumed.
Congress can alter the number of Supreme Court justices and even limit the types of cases the court can hear—a power known as "jurisdiction stripping"—through simple legislation. Despite this authority, a deep-seated political norm has prevented Congress from exercising it aggressively, leaving its full constitutional extent untested.
The U.S. is unique among developed nations for granting judges life tenure. While intended to ensure independence, this practice incentivizes justices to strategically retire under a politically aligned president, injecting politics into the end of their careers just as it exists at the beginning.
The Court increasingly uses an "emergency" or "shadow" docket for major decisions. These rulings bypass oral arguments and full briefings, often resulting in orders with little to no explanation. This practice contradicts the judicial branch's claim to legitimacy, which is based on reasoned persuasion, not just power.
The Supreme Court's authority to declare laws unconstitutional—its main function today—is not explicitly mentioned in Article 3. This power of judicial review was established by the Court itself in the early 19th century, fundamentally shaping its role in the U.S. government's balance of powers.
The legal requirement that a plaintiff have a direct injury ("standing") is applied inconsistently. It can be a significant hurdle in some cases but is conveniently overlooked in others, suggesting it functions as a tool for the court to accept or reject cases based on its desire to rule on the underlying issue.
An increasing number of Supreme Court justices previously clerked for the Court, with several directly succeeding the justice they once worked for. This trend suggests a self-perpetuating system where retiring justices may influence the White House to appoint their "favorite clerk," creating a dynamic akin to an inherited title.
Each Supreme Court justice employs four elite, recent law school graduates as clerks. These young, unelected individuals hold immense responsibility, making preliminary judgments on which cases the court should hear and writing the first drafts of opinions that shape American law—a reality not contemplated by the Constitution.
Viewing the Roberts Court as a single, unbroken entity is misleading. Its early phase was a 5-4 court where Justice Kennedy often sided with liberals, creating a sense of balance. His retirement and the appointment of three Trump justices created a new, more predictably conservative and lopsided era.
To report on complex, lengthy Supreme Court decisions almost instantly, journalists spend months preparing. They pre-write extensive background material that applies regardless of the outcome. When a decision drops, they add the result and key quotes to publish an initial story in minutes.