Top Law Schools

Anonymous User wrote:Since my PS is fairly personal, I thought my Yale 250 could shed some light on my interest in the Supreme Court as a political institution. I have written multiple research papers and will be writing an honors thesis on this subject, so I feel like it makes sense to talk about it a bit. However, I am concerned about the clarity of what I have written. Any feedback would be really appreciated.

Word count: 249.

Over the last century, the Supreme Court has demonstrated an increasing willingness to initiate social change. The Court mandated the racial desegregation of schools, abolished (and reinstated) the death penalty, and effectively legalized abortion and same-sex marriage. Some scholars (most notably Barry Friedman) have noted that these decisions have largely aligned with public opinion, but that does not necessarily make the Court’s behavior appropriate. After all, it seems anti-democratic for an unelected body of nine people to settle important political questions.
However, some evidence suggests that Supreme Court justices are accountable to the public. For instance, after the Court abolished the death penalty in Furman v. Georgia, there was enormous backlash against the decision, and the Court soon reinstated the death penalty. Similarly, after pro-life activists mobilized the public against Roe v. Wade, the Court began to grant states increasing leeway in restricting abortion. Empirical studies by Epstein and Martin further support the conclusion that, when the Court strays too far from what the public deems acceptable, it quickly reins itself in.
Why does the Court seem to follow public opinion? Its lack of enforcement power may be the answer. Justices might be concerned that, if popular sentiment allowed elected officials to defy the Court with impunity, a dangerous precedent would be set. However, since there is no way to empirically test this theory, we cannot reliably determine whether the Court is actually democratically accountable or whether it simply happens to agree with the public most of the time.

pretzeltime wrote: If you're going to write about law-related issues in your PS or 250 you gotta knock that shit way out of the park. You're going to have Yale law profs reading this, and I do not think you have suggested something that they have never thought about, or provided a particularly unique take on it.

SamuelDanforth wrote:If you want my harsh opinion, this doesn't tell me anything more than a Friedman or Waldron paper abstract would, and probably tells me much less.

theconsigliere wrote:I'd prefer to read a 250 about your thoughts/opinions on this topic rather than this, which reads more like a summary of a chapter out of a textbook.

pretzeltime wrote:And by the way, you clearly are a solid writer, it's not that I thought this draft was badly written.