The renowned sentence from Supreme Court’s opinion in Marbury v. Madison, “It is emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is,” consigned to the Supreme Court the accountability of determining the constitutionality of statutes. This power bestowed to the Supreme Court starkly contrasts with that of other federal courts. Unlike other federal courts in the U.S, the Supreme Court is not bound by precedent and holds the ability to overturn their previous decisions. However, for maintaining its credibility, the Court refers to its own previous decisions, commenced in the form of citations, which also helps to legitimize its rulings beyond those born out of necessity. This article explores in-depth, the citation practices of the Supreme Court, focusing particularly on references to lower court rulings.
Lower court decisions, although non-binding, perform various roles and provide numerous perspectives for the Court, which often refers to them in a bid to support their positions. While in some instances references to lower court rulings offer relevant examples to a given case, in some, they may illustrate how lower courts have implemented Supreme Court policies that the Court wants to elaborate on when dealing with a similar issue. This wisdom is arguably due to the lower courts’ understanding of the issue at hand, leading the Supreme Court justices to reference previous rulings.
Beyond the substance of the lower court’s decision, there seems to be a relationship between the author of the lower court opinion and the citation by the Supreme Court. This past term saw some lower court judges, such as Judges Easterbrook and Sutton, having their decisions cited multiple times by the Supreme Court justices, highlighting their influence and the significance of their decisions.
Interestingly, the Supreme Court does not limit its citations to decisions from the lower court circuit from where the case was decided. Instead, the justices refer to lower court rulings from various circuits. The Supreme Court seems to rely heavily on recent lower court decisions, indicating that recent rulings might offer more contextually relevant insights to the justices.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court’s citation practice, though they are non-binding, offers a unique lens to understand the court’s decision-making process, the substance of the decisions it values, and the authors of lower court opinions it respects.