Talk:History of the Supreme Court of the United States

Merrick Garland nomination 2016
I know it is embarrassing, but the unprecedented refusal of a Senate majority to consider Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland in 2016 (Mitch McConnell...) should be mentioned in the Roberts Court section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.144.216.199 (talk) 18:49, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

11th amendment
The Rehnquist Court needs some talk of the 11th amendment, quite the sea change.

OR. The Burger Court (1969–1986), United States v. Nixon
It is inconceivable that the Supreme Court would rule "that the courts have the final voice in determining constitutional questions." Even the entry on Wikipedia speaks against such a far-reaching and novel conclusion in United States v. Nixon. Unless specific language can be found to this effect in the ruling itself, such a statement must be considered the misunderstandings of an uneducated novice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.222.149.167 (talk) 19:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

C class
I gave this a rating of C, although I considered B. It is well organized and largely well-written, with good use of images, but it has very few inline citations. – Quadell (talk) 15:26, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Riding circuit
From inception, the justices were required to ride circuit as well as sitting together, a severe service at times due to weather and poor transportation. This article should describe this service more fully, and especially since some lawyers declined to serve on the court because of this requirement. --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Change from six to nine justices?
When did Congress change the size of the court from six to nine justices? --DThomsen8 (talk) 00:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I came here looking for the same information. As mentioned, 6 justices (including a chief justice) were established by the Judiciary Act of 1869 during the First Congress. Although under President Adams the Judiciary Act of 1801 reduced this number to 5, under Jefferson it was repealed before there were any vacancies by the Judiciary Act of 1802, then increased to 7 in 1807 by the Seventh Circuit Act creating a circuit for Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessee. The number of justices increased to 9 in 1837 by the Eighth & Ninth Circuits Act. (On his last day in office, it was signed by President Jackson, who appointed John Catron. Since William Smith declined nomination, President van Buren would appoint the next.) Under Lincoln, the number increased to 10 in 1863 by the Tenth Circuit Act with the creation of a new circuit consisting of California and Oregon. The Judicial Circuits Act of 1866 reduced the number to 7 by gradual elimination as the justices retired, denying signing President Johnson the opportunity of any appointments. There were still 8 justices on the Supreme Court when the Judiciary Act of 1869 was enacted under Grant to expand the number to the current 9. This was not changed in the Judiciary Act of 1891, which abolished circuit riding in establishing the Courts of Appeals and writ of certiorari, or in the Judiciary Act of 1925, which gave the Supreme Court more discretion over the latter. Roosevelt's Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937, which would have increased the number to as many as 15, ultimately failed to pass after being held in committee by a fellow Democrat.
 * Released to public domain. C.f. Judiciary Act, Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937, List of Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. DAVilla (talk) 06:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Nominees and retirements
There is a subsection devoted to O'Connor's retirement, the subsequent nomination of Miers and then the nomination of Alito, but this is the first place and last place in the article where such matters are discussed. There is, for example, no mention of the more recent retirement of Souter and the subsequent nomination of Sotomayor. This is inconsistent. Ishboyfay (talk) 02:41, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Should include CU v. FEC in Roberts Court. More important than any decision in the last 30 years. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.26.102.155 (talk) 02:04, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Image addition
I'm about to propose a change to the "History" section in the main Supreme Court article, of which the I just added here may be a casualty. I'm accordingly adding it here; I add this note to forestall objections that it is duplicative having it in both articles. It is now; shortly, it probably won't be. - Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 23:33, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Some items for current Court
Related to Electoral reform in the United States ... and
 * John Roberts has been criticized of judicial activism regarding the process surrounding the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision in a May 2012 article in The New Yorker.
 * Approval Rating for Justices Hits Just 44% in New Poll June 7, 2012

99.181.128.4 (talk) 02:08, 11 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Perhaps relevant if the New Yorker notes other criticism, but not related to Electoral reform in the United States. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 04:37, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Supreme Court Decisions from 1760-1773?
Find Law lists several decisions under the years 1760, 1762, 1763, 1764, 1767, 1768 and 1773 here https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/us-supreme-court/years that are somehow connected to the US Supreme Court. Some of the details on how this came about can be seen under the first of these cases, as listed elsewhere on Wikipedia Lessee of Ashton v. Ashton. Apart from that, I don't understand what this is all about.
 * Prior to the formation of the Supreme Court of the United States, the leading court in the colonies (though not having legal authority over others) was the Supreme Court of the Colony of Pennsylvania. When people started assembling leading cases, they started with those, and then went to cases of the Supreme Court of the United States once one was created. bd2412  T 22:47, 30 June 2019 (UTC)