Changes

by [[President]] [[Ford]]: Justice [[John Paul Stevens]]

by [[President]] [[Ford]]: Justice [[John Paul Stevens]]

by [[President]] [[Carter]]: no one

by [[President]] Carter: no one

by [[President]] [[Reagan]]: Justices O’Connor, Scalia and Kennedy

by [[President]] [[Reagan]]: Justices O’Connor, Scalia and Kennedy

by the first [[President]] [[Bush]]: Justices Souter and Thomas

by the first [[President]] [[Bush]]: Justices Souter and Thomas

The [[Court]] has forged an enduring majority on issues of [[federalism ]](returning power to states), [[free speech]] (expanding free speech protections) and [[school vouchers]].  The [[Court]] has also recently reduced [[intolerance]] towards [[religion]], allowing [[prayer]] groups as after-school activities.

The [[Court]] has forged an enduring majority on issues of [[federalism ]](returning power to states), [[free speech]] (expanding free speech protections) and [[school vouchers]].  The [[Court]] has also recently reduced [[intolerance]] towards [[religion]], allowing [[prayer]] groups as after-school activities.

The [[Supreme Court]] held in favor of [[President]] [[George W. Bush]] to resolve the disputed election in 2000.  That was a narrow 5-4 margin, even though Republican-appointed justices hold a 7-2 majority.  In fact, many important decisions are decided on only a 5-4 basis.  The decision allowing [[school vouchers]], whereby parents could receive vouchers from public schools to attend private schools, was by a 5-4 vote.  Polarization on the [[Court]] seems to favor [[razor]]-thin margins in decisions.

The [[Supreme Court]] held in favor of [[President]] [[George W. Bush]] to resolve the disputed election in 2000.  That was a narrow 5-4 margin, even though Republican-appointed justices hold a 7-2 majority.  In fact, many important decisions are decided on only a 5-4 basis.  The decision allowing [[school vouchers]], whereby parents could receive vouchers from public schools to attend private schools, was by a 5-4 vote.  Polarization on the [[Court]] seems to favor razor-thin margins in decisions.

The [[Chief Justice]]’s vote is not worth more than any other [[Justice]] on the [[Court]].  However, he does have the advantage of deciding who writes the [[opinion]] for his side in a case.  Whichever side he is on (majority or dissent), he picks the person to write the decision of his side.  In important cases, he picks himself to write it.  The most senior [[justice]] on the other side picks who writes the opinion for that side.

The [[Chief Justice]]’s vote is not worth more than any other [[Justice]] on the [[Court]].  However, he does have the advantage of deciding who writes the [[opinion]] for his side in a case.  Whichever side he is on (majority or dissent), he picks the person to write the decision of his side.  In important cases, he picks himself to write it.  The most senior [[justice]] on the other side picks who writes the opinion for that side.