22.5.5 Rational, Cultural, and Structural Approaches: UK vs. US Supreme Courts

Overview of Rational, Cultural, and Structural Approaches

• Rational Approach:
  • Focuses on the actions and decisions of individuals, such as judges, based on their self-interest, goals, and strategic calculations.
  • Examines how justices in the UK and US Supreme Courts make decisions based on legal reasoning, personal beliefs, and the broader political environment.
• Cultural Approach:
  • Emphasizes the role of traditions, norms, and values in shaping the behavior of institutions and individuals.
  • Explores how the legal culture in the UK and US influences the operation and decisions of the Supreme Courts, including judicial independence and public expectations.
• Structural Approach:
  • Concentrates on the institutional framework and legal structures that define the powers and functions of the Supreme Courts.
  • Looks at how the constitutional and legal systems in the UK and US shape the role and authority of the Supreme Courts.

Rational Approach: Individual Decision-Making

• UK Supreme Court:
  • Judges in the UK Supreme Court often make decisions based on legal precedent, statutory interpretation, and the principles of common law. Their decisions are influenced by the desire to maintain judicial impartiality and uphold the rule of law.
  • Rational calculations may involve balancing the interests of different branches of government and ensuring that decisions do not overstep judicial authority, especially given the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.
• US Supreme Court:
  • US Supreme Court justices are appointed for life and often make decisions that reflect their ideological leanings and interpretations of the Constitution. The rational approach here considers how justices might vote in a way that aligns with their personal beliefs, political ideologies, or the interests of the president who appointed them.
  • The rational approach also accounts for the strategic considerations of US justices when issuing rulings that may have broader political implications, such as affecting future legislation or public policy.
• Similarities:
  • In both the UK and US, justices use rational decision-making to interpret laws and constitutions. They consider legal precedents, the impact of their rulings, and the broader legal context.
• Differences:
  • US Supreme Court justices may be more influenced by ideological and political factors due to the lifetime tenure and the political nature of their appointments. In contrast, UK justices tend to emphasize legal reasoning and the constraints of parliamentary sovereignty.

Cultural Approach: Norms, Values, and Traditions

• UK Supreme Court:
  • The UK legal culture emphasizes the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, meaning that the courts cannot overturn primary legislation passed by Parliament. The cultural approach highlights the tradition of judicial restraint in the UK, where judges typically defer to Parliament's authority.
  • The role of the UK judiciary has evolved over time, particularly with the establishment of the UK Supreme Court in 2009, which reflects a shift towards greater judicial independence. However, the UK judiciary remains culturally committed to upholding the supremacy of Parliament.
• US Supreme Court:
  • The US legal culture is rooted in the principle of judicial review, established in Marbury v. Madison (1803), which allows the Supreme Court to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. The cultural approach in the US highlights the strong tradition of judicial activism, where the Court plays a significant role in shaping public policy.
  • The US Supreme Court is also culturally seen as a guardian of the Constitution, with the power to protect individual rights against government overreach. This has led to landmark decisions on civil rights, abortion, and same-sex marriage.
• Similarities:
  • Both courts are influenced by their respective legal cultures, which shape how justices interpret laws and make decisions. In both countries, the judiciary is seen as an important check on the other branches of government.
• Differences:
  • The UK Supreme Court operates within a legal culture that prioritizes parliamentary sovereignty, leading to a more restrained approach to judicial power. In contrast, the US Supreme Court's culture of judicial review and activism gives it a more prominent role in influencing public policy and safeguarding constitutional rights.

Structural Approach: Institutional Framework and Legal Systems

• UK Supreme Court:
  • The UK operates under an uncodified constitution, where the Supreme Court's role is to interpret laws in line with parliamentary statutes and common law. The structural approach examines how the lack of a single written constitution limits the Court's ability to challenge Parliament's decisions.
  • The UK Supreme Court's structure is also influenced by the principle of parliamentary sovereignty, meaning that the Court can issue declarations of incompatibility with the European Convention on Human Rights but cannot strike down legislation.
• US Supreme Court:
  • The US operates under a codified constitution, which grants the Supreme Court significant powers of judicial review. The structural approach highlights how the US Constitution provides a clear framework for the Court to interpret and enforce constitutional rights.
  • The structure of the US federal system also gives the Supreme Court a role in resolving disputes between states and the federal government, further enhancing its influence and authority.
• Similarities:
  • Both courts serve as the highest judicial authorities in their respective countries, with the power to interpret laws and ensure the proper application of justice.
• Differences:
  • The structural differences between the UK and US legal systems result in different levels of judicial power. The US Supreme Court has broader authority to challenge and overturn legislation, while the UK Supreme Court operates within the constraints of parliamentary sovereignty.

Comparative Analysis: Rational, Cultural, and Structural Approaches

Aspect	UK Supreme Court	US Supreme Court
Rational Approach	Judges focus on legal reasoning, precedent, and statutory interpretation. Strategic decision-making is influenced by the principle of parliamentary sovereignty.	Justices may align decisions with personal ideologies, strategic considerations, and political factors, influenced by lifetime appointments and the power of judicial review.
Cultural Approach	Emphasizes judicial restraint, parliamentary sovereignty, and a tradition of deferring to legislative authority.	Emphasizes judicial activism, judicial review, and the protection of constitutional rights. The Court is culturally viewed as a key player in shaping public policy.
Structural Approach	Operates under an uncodified constitution with a focus on interpreting laws within the constraints of parliamentary sovereignty.	Operates under a codified constitution with the power of judicial review, allowing the Court to strike down unconstitutional laws and resolve federal disputes.

Conclusion

• UK: The UK Supreme Court operates within a framework that prioritizes parliamentary sovereignty and judicial restraint. The rational, cultural, and structural approaches all emphasize the Court's limited power to challenge legislation and its focus on interpreting laws within the existing legal framework.
• US: The US Supreme Court has broader powers due to its role in interpreting the Constitution and exercising judicial review. The rational, cultural, and structural approaches highlight the Court's significant influence on public policy, its tradition of judicial activism, and its ability to act as a check on the other branches of government.

Examine the ways in which the US and UK Supreme Courts are similar

Paragraph 1:

• Both the final court of appeal, the highest court in the lands

• In the US, the Supreme Court is the judicial branch of government, and the Chief Justice,

• Roberts is the second most powerful person in the US behind President Biden

• Brexit removed the role of the ECJ and re-established the UK Supreme Court Paragraph 2:

• Judges have security of tenure- the judges have the role for life, unless they retire, impeached

• Judges will not be sacked for their decisions, and must not have a political bias

• Both UK and US justices have their wages sent by an independent body Paragraph 3:

• Final say on judicial decisions

• In the US, the SC rules on cases of utmost constitutional importance

• Bush wanted to use military tribunals during the Iraq war, where people had limited rights, and the SC did not allow this

• In the UK, Johnson tried to suspend Parliament for 6 weeks to get Brexit done, the UK SC did not allow this