Alito And Roberts: Three Decades On The Supreme Court Bench

Pedro Alvarez

4 min read

Post on May 20, 2025

4.7

Share

Justice John Roberts: The Chief Justice's Legacy

Roberts' Jurisprudence: A Balancing Act?

Chief Justice John Roberts' approach to judicial decision-making is often described as a delicate balancing act. While considered a conservative, he's demonstrated a willingness to uphold precedents and avoid overtly partisan rulings. His commitment to judicial restraint is a key aspect of his legacy, influencing many Roberts Court decisions. This approach is particularly evident in:

• The Affordable Care Act (ACA): In National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012), Roberts sided with the liberal justices to uphold the ACA's individual mandate, a decision that surprised many legal observers. He framed the mandate as a tax, thereby finding a constitutional basis for its enactment. This decision showcases his pragmatism and a willingness to prioritize the stability of the law over strict ideological adherence.

• Cases involving state power vs. federal power: Roberts has consistently sought to define the appropriate balance between federal and state authority. His opinions often reflect a preference for states' rights, yet he has also upheld federal laws when he deemed them constitutionally sound. Analyzing these Chief Justice Roberts opinions reveals a nuanced understanding of federalism.

• Key Rulings and Impact:

  • Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Struck down a key provision of the Voting Rights Act, significantly altering the balance of power in election administration.
  • King v. Burwell (2015): Upheld subsidies for healthcare purchased through federal exchanges, ensuring the continued viability of the Affordable Care Act.
  • June Medical Services L.L.C. v. Russo (2020): Struck down a Louisiana law placing restrictions on abortion providers.

Roberts' Role as Chief Justice

Beyond his judicial opinions, Chief Justice Roberts' leadership style significantly influences the Roberts Court leadership and its internal dynamics. He's known for his emphasis on collegiality and consensus-building, though the increasingly polarized political climate has challenged this approach. His role in managing the Court's docket and administrative functions is critical to its efficiency and overall functioning. Understanding the Chief Justice Roberts influence requires examining both his judicial rulings and his management of the Court as an institution.

Justice Samuel Alito: A Conservative Voice

Alito's Judicial Philosophy: Strict Constructionism and Originalism

Justice Samuel Alito is a staunch conservative, known for his adherence to strict constructionism and originalism. This Justice Alito rulings approach emphasizes interpreting the Constitution based on the original intent of the framers, often leading to decisions that limit the scope of federal power and individual rights. His opinions frequently reflect this philosophy.

• Key Cases showcasing Originalism:
  • District of Columbia v. Heller (2008): Alito joined the majority opinion affirming an individual's right to bear arms.
  • Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010): He concurred in the majority opinion, substantially impacting campaign finance law.
  • Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022): Authored the majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion. These examples clearly reflect the impact of Alito Supreme Court opinions on the legal landscape.

Alito's Impact on Landmark Cases

Justice Alito's role in several landmark Supreme Court cases has been profoundly impactful. His Alito dissenting opinions, particularly in cases like Obergefell v. Hodges (2015), which legalized same-sex marriage, highlight his deep-seated conservative views. His role in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization (2022) resulted in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, a ruling with far-reaching consequences for reproductive rights and American society. Understanding the Alito impact on the Supreme Court necessitates analyzing his contributions to these pivotal cases.

Comparing Alito and Roberts: Similarities and Differences

Points of Convergence

Despite their differing judicial styles, Justices Alito and Roberts often find common ground, particularly in cases involving limiting federal power or upholding certain aspects of state authority. Their contrasting judicial philosophies may lead to different reasoning processes, but they sometimes arrive at the same outcome.

Points of Divergence

However, significant ideological differences exist between the two justices. These differences are most apparent in cases involving social issues, such as abortion rights (where their stances diverged sharply) or affirmative action. Examining the Alito vs Roberts Supreme Court voting patterns in such cases reveals a clear ideological divide. Analyzing their Alito and Roberts Supreme Court dissenting opinions is crucial to understanding these divergences.

Conclusion

The combined tenure of Justices Alito and Roberts represents a significant chapter in the history of the Supreme Court. Their individual contributions, characterized by distinct approaches to constitutional interpretation, have profoundly reshaped American law and society. Their legacy continues to be debated and analyzed. By exploring the Alito and Roberts Supreme Court decisions and their implications, we can better comprehend the evolving landscape of American jurisprudence. Learn more about the impact of Alito and Roberts Supreme Court decisions on American society today by researching their opinions on specific cases or exploring legal scholarship analyzing their contributions to the Court.