Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Fewer Than a Third of Americans Know Supreme Court Rulings can't be appealed

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
swag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:20 PM
Original message
Fewer Than a Third of Americans Know Supreme Court Rulings can't be appealed
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 05:34 PM by swag
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=ind_focus.story&STORY=/www/story/09-13-2007/0004662377&EDATE=THU+Sep+13+2007,+01:10+PM

. . .

When asked "if a person disagrees with a ruling by the U.S. Supreme
Court can he or she appeal the ruling to the Federal Court of Appeals?"
only 30 percent know that the high court rulings are final, 32 percent
think rulings can be appealed and 38 percent are "not sure" or "don't
know."

"These survey findings show just how important it is to educate all
Americans about their government and the Constitution that created it,"
said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy
Center. "The health of a democracy depends on an enlightened and engaged
citizenry."

Other findings include:

-- A majority of Americans, 55 percent, do not know that when the
Supreme Court rules five to four on a case the decision is the law
and needs to be followed. Fourteen percent believe the decision is
sent to Congress for reconsideration, seven percent believe the
decision is sent back to the lower courts and 34 percent simply
"don't know."

-- Only one in seven Americans (15 percent) can correctly name John
Roberts as Chief Justice of the United States while two-thirds of
Americans (66 percent) know at least one of the judges on the Fox
television show American Idol.
. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ThomWV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:21 PM
Response to Original message
1. O Wow Man! You mean someone can't appeal to the President - can't he do what he wants?
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 05:22 PM by ThomWV
Same sort of idiots that think that the President is the "Leader of the Free World".

He is the head of one of three branches of Government, nothing more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Justitia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. OMG, that's horrifying! -eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mythsaje Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:23 PM
Response to Original message
3. Our schools are falling down on this...
Big Time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:24 PM
Response to Original message
4. double stamp'zz, no erase'zz?!?!?! that's fucked up...
x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
swag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yeah. Where's my re-do?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L. Coyote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:26 PM
Response to Original message
6. unless changed by the Supreme Court, not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hootinholler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #6
19. Well, there's the principle of Stare Decisis
Which says they're supposed to have a really good reason to overturn a prior decision. They also cannot arbitrarily take up an issue, they need a new case. But yes, they can overturn themselves.

-Hoot
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chipper Chat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
7. Al knew it was safe to grow a beard after Dec 2000.
Thanks a lot Sandra D.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Those in power want to keep it this way.
If they cared how little the most of us know about the system, they'd actually fund education in a significant way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Manifestor_of_Light Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:30 PM
Response to Original message
9. For this I went to law school?
I knew this stuff BEFORE I went to law school.

Circa 1982: Two preppie classmates said "Now that there's a woman on the Supreme Court maybe some day there'll be a black person."

Ronnie Reagan had just appointed Sandra Day O'Connor.

Well, when I heard that statement I was stunned. Then I said, "Excuse me. There is a black man on the Supreme Court already. His name is Thurgood Marshall. He was counsel to the Plaintiffs on Brown v. Board of Education. He was appointed by President Lyndon Johnson.

"And by the way, about five miles east of here, there's a law school NAMED AFTER HIM. The Thurgood Marshall School of Law at Texas Southern University."

These law students looked at me like I was NUTS.

:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. *sigh*
every day it gets harder and harder to consider "Idiocracy" a work of fiction
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. Nothing's final. SCOTUS decisions can be overturned by the same or future SCOTUS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
swag Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. I just changed the PR Newswire headline for clarification.
Gracias.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. I'm not a lawyer, but I play a picky-ass mofo on tv. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. and congress can (and often does) re-do legislation that legally
changes laws that SCOTUS may have "shot down".. It does not do the people actually involved in the SCOTUS cases, but often by the time a case gets to the scotus, those people have long-since moved on anyway..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
no_hypocrisy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #10
22. Or "simply" amending the Constituion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #22
25. Yup - that's one of the 2 checks on the SCOTUS. Or 3, depending how you count.
Edited on Thu Sep-13-07 08:28 PM by BlooInBloo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
13. Most Americans are uneducated and incurious.
I'm surprised that it's just 55%.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Nobody ever went broke betting on the stupidity of the American public...
... I can't remember who said that - love that line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. LOL at irony.
That was Mencken.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #17
20. GAHHH!!!!!
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
18. And then they condemn it when they don't agree with it
I love it when they are condemned as "unelected." As if they are nothing but an extra legislature.

It is scary that the very concept of the rule of law is beyond the comprehension of so many of the voters.

I have a relative with a doctorate in chemistry, no less, who cannot understand why the Supreme Court does not have to be unanimous, like a jury. He really thinks he is brilliant for picking out that "flaw" and no amount of explanation gets through to him.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasLawyer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
21. The "Supreme Court" isn't final because it's supreme.
It's supreme because it's final.

A quote from my Constitutional Law professor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
23. So Roe vs Wade will last into infinity...correct.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-13-07 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
24. I didn't know
That's kind of scary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC