Some see value in split Supreme Court's minimalist approach to cases
The U.S. Supreme Court decision on Monday to remand the contraceptive opt-out case is an example of the narrow rulings being issued by a court seeking to avoid 4-4 ties.
And that’s a good thing, according to a law professor who spoke with the New York Times.
The case, Zubik v. Burwell, involved a challenge to the opt-out procedure for religiously affiliated organizations that don’t want to provide contraceptive insurance coverage for their employees. The Supreme Court had noted a potential compromise and remanded the case to explore the issue.
Georgia State University law professor Eric Segall tells the New York Times the remand could lead to a better solution for both sides.
“This type of consensus decision making,” Segall told the newspaper, “is a welcome change from the normal political and sometimes partisan approach we normally see in important 5-4 opinions, where one side can impose its own agenda on the parties and the country.”
The case shows why “the sky-is-falling claims by many court watchers about an eight-member court are overstated,” he said.
The article notes that the court has yet to issue major decisions on abortion, immigration and affirmative action.
In oral arguments on the abortion case, Whole Woman’s Health v. Hellerstedt, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy suggested returning the case to the lower courts to develop evidence about the impact of abortion-clinic regulations, raising the possibility of another minimalist ruling. In the immigration case, United States v. Texas, oral arguments suggested there could be a 4-4 tie that would avoid a sweeping decision on whether President Obama had violated his constitutional duty to enforce the nation’s laws by deferring deportations for millions of immigrants.
But the recusal of Justice Elena Kagan in the case challenging affirmative action in college admissions, Fisher v. University of Texas, has eliminated the possibility of a tie.
Related article:
ABA Journal: “After Scalia: The Supreme Court goes back to work amid uncertainty”
