History of the U.S. Supreme Court

This paper details the history of the United States Supreme Court, from its conception in 1789 to the present day. The paper will explore how the court has evolved since its inception, beginning with the creation of a federal judiciary system and culminating with current debates about judicial interpretation.

The first U.S. Supreme Court was established as part of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which aimed to create a unified judicial branch for the country. Its original membership included Chief Justice John Jay, Associate Justices William Cushing, James Wilson, John Blair Jr., Robert H. Harrison, John Rutledge and James Iredell. This early court primarily interpreted laws enacted by Congress, rather than establishing new ones; it also had limited jurisdiction in cases involving disputes between states or foreign governments and citizens.

The Supreme Court’s power increased significantly in the 19th century, after it began to hear cases involving constitutional interpretation. This period saw the court issuing a series of landmark decisions that established the basis of its current role as an interpreter and protector of the Constitution. These include Marbury v. Madison (1803), which established judicial review; McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), which upheld Congress’ authority to regulate interstate commerce; Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which denied African Americans citizenship rights; and Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which established the “separate but equal” doctrine for public facilities segregation.

In the 20th century, the Supreme Court increasingly took on a more active role in deciding cases involving controversial legal and social issues. This period saw numerous landmark rulings, such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which forbid segregation in public schools; Roe v. Wade (1973), which legalized abortion; and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which established same-sex marriage rights across the U.S.. In recent years, debates over judicial interpretation techniques have been heated, particularly with respect to originalism—a method of interpreting the Constitution based on its original meaning—and “living constitutionalism”—which interprets the document within the context of modern times.