“Sometimes up, sometimes down; my life’s so uncertain with you not around.”

–from “Come See About Me,” by the (other) Supremes; 1964

In their infinite wisdom, our Founding Fathers created the Supreme Court, its duties enumerated in Article III of the U.S. Constitution. The number of justices on the Court has varied from 5 to 10, but has been set at 9 for over 150 years. It is, of course, the highest court in the land, and it hears cases ranging from those of national importance to those of ordinary citizens that have gone through the lower appellate courts. Its decisions affect us all.

The justices are selected by the U.S. President, with confirmation by the U.S. Senate; however, unlike appointees in the Executive Branch, they do not serve at the president’s pleasure. They are appointed for life. Justices selected for their presumed conservative or liberal judicial track records don’t always follow suit once on the Court. Examples include Justice Byron White, appointed by John F. Kennedy, and Justice David Souter, appointed by George H.W. Bush. The Court’s rulings are often criticized by their fellow citizens, who feel the justices betrayed the values and rulings for which they were appointed; however, rather than berate them for that, we should celebrate it. Why?

Just as Lady Justice sits outside the Supreme Court building, blindfolded and holding the scales of justice, as the final arbiters on legal matters, it’s vitally important that the Court’s members also be blind. In order for justice to be ensured for all, from the most powerful CEO to the least of those among us, justices can’t sway with political winds and must not be beholden to any party or person. This means they are often morally and legally compelled to rule in favor of something with which they might personally disagree. They do so in order to safeguard the integrity of the Constitution. Generally, they practice judicial restraint, and they are often guided by stare decisis–what we know as “precedent.” They may overturn a law if it violates the Constitution, but it is not their job to write new legislation. That is the duty of the legislative branch, although more and more of our legislators seem to want the Court to adopt that duty and provide political cover for them.

A justice is often categorized as conservative or liberal, but can also be defined as a constructionist or an activist. The former interprets the Constitution and legislation as they are believed to have been meant when written, whereas the latter favors a more contemporary interpretation. For instance, a justice who believes that the right to bear arms extends from 18th Century muskets and pistols to the variety of arms available today, must also believe that the 1964 Civil Rights Act rightfully includes today’s LGBTQ community when cases concerning discrimination on the basis of sex are considered. Notwithstanding a justice’s personal view, if he or she believes the law relevant to the matter before the Court complies with our Constitution, the law must stand. Only our citizenry, by an amendment to the Constitution or through our lawmakers, can change it. Consistency is paramount–something we often may have trouble accepting–if the integrity of the process is to be preserved. Remarkably, despite all of these considerations, it is not uncommon for the Court to rule unanimously, or nearly so–perhaps a testament to the notion that great minds think alike.

Finally, a word about the Court’s collegiality, something we badly miss in the U.S. Congress today. By all reports, the justices get along with one another quite well, notwithstanding their personal judicial temperaments and irrespective of which party’s president put them on the bench. When the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia was on the Court, he and his wife often socialized and vacationed with the liberal Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and her husband. I can’t imagine Senators McConnell and Schumer, or Representatives Pelosi and McCarthy, even breaking bread together, much less sharing a ride on Space Mountain at Disney World! To be fair, the justices have the luxury of not following any political agenda or worrying about the next election cycle. Perhaps that makes their job easier but, in the process, it also protects the rule of law, our citizenry, and the Constitution.

With apologies to Motown’s Supremes, our opinion of the Court may sometimes be “up,” and sometimes be “down,” but I believe all of our lives are more certain with the justices around. We are fortunate the Court exists and functions as equitably as it does.