Throughout the past two months, the COVID-19 pandemic has dominated the national news cycle. The White House and Capitol Hill have issued countless press releases detailing their efforts to handle existing cases and prevent further spread. Consequently, the public is well aware of the executive and legislative responses to COVID-19. However, the judicial branch has remained out of the limelight. This is unsurprising, given the private nature of Supreme Court proceedings. Yet, the question still remains: how has the Supreme Court responded to the crisis?
Unlike the President and Congress, the Supreme Court has not issued any policy responses to the pandemic. This is because it is not constitutionally empowered to do so. Justices are forbidden to “legislate from the bench.” They cannot create laws; rather, they can interpret the laws developed by Congress and enacted by the President.
Thus, while the executive and legislative branches have issued policies to handle the pandemic, the Supreme Court has played a very different role. The Justices have continued to hear critical cases, just as they do under normal circumstances. This has ensured that constitutional matters are settled and that justice is upheld in the midst of the crisis.
However, although the Justices are hearing cases, business has hardly continued as usual. The Court cancelled each of its March and April sessions due to the pandemic, and will hear 10 of the postponed cases during the month of May. For the first time in history, the proceedings will be conducted via teleconference. Interestingly, the oral arguments will be broadcast to the public in the form of audio. This marks another unprecedented event: the first time that the public can hear the Court’s oral arguments. Since the very first case in 1791, oral arguments have been conducted privately.
Over a six-day span in May, the Justices will deliberate several highly-anticipated cases. One such case is the Little Sisters of the Poor v. Pennsylvania. The state of Pennsylvania sued the Catholic nuns over their institute’s insurance policy. The Little Sisters refuse to provide contraceptive insurance coverage for their employees, as the use of contraceptives violates Catholic doctrine. After lower courts ruled in favor of Pennsylvania, the Little Sisters appealed to the Supreme Court. The decision will set important precedents concerning contraceptive coverage and the religious rights of non-profit employers.
On Tuesday, May 12th, the Court will hear two cases concerning the privacy of President Trump’s financial information. The cases Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP and Trump v. Vance question the constitutionality of particular efforts to investigate the President’s tax returns and related forms. The decisions will set important precedents for the extent of sitting presidents’ financial privacy and their immunity from subpoenas while in office.
As these cases and others continue to unfold, several online resources will provide updates on the proceedings. The official May Argument Calendar can be found on the Supreme Court’s website, and oral arguments will be broadcast at 10 am through several media platforms. The Oyez website will provide summaries of the proceedings, as well as recordings of the oral arguments. Be sure to stay informed on the critical cases in the days ahead. The courtroom may be closed, but the judiciary continues to uphold its constitutional duties. Justice remains alive and well in the United States!
0
0
Average Rating