Two Decades On The Bench: Examining The Legacies Of Alito And Roberts

Chloe Fitzgerald

5 min read

Post on May 20, 2025

4.1

Share

Justice Samuel Alito's Conservative Legacy

Justice Alito's tenure is characterized by a staunchly conservative approach to constitutional interpretation. His decisions consistently reflect a commitment to textualism and originalism, prioritizing the literal meaning of the Constitution's text and the framers' original intent.

Key Cases and Decisions

Alito's influence is evident in numerous landmark cases. His contributions have significantly impacted various areas of law.

• Citizens United v. FEC (2010): Alito's concurrence played a crucial role in the majority opinion that dramatically altered campaign finance laws, allowing for increased corporate and union spending in elections.
• Shelby County v. Holder (2013): Alito wrote the majority opinion that invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, resulting in the removal of preclearance requirements for voting changes in several states.
• Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores (2014): Alito's majority opinion significantly broadened religious exemptions from the Affordable Care Act's contraception mandate.
• Janus v. AFSCME (2018): Alito wrote the majority opinion weakening public sector unions by ruling that non-union members cannot be compelled to pay agency fees.
• Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2022): Alito authored the majority opinion overturning Roe v. Wade, eliminating the constitutional right to abortion.

His judicial philosophy emphasizes a strict reading of the Constitution, often prioritizing original meaning over evolving societal norms. Critics argue this approach disregards precedent and social progress.

Impact on Constitutional Law

Alito's decisions have profoundly shifted the balance of power within the Supreme Court, notably impacting:

• Campaign finance: Citizens United fundamentally altered campaign finance regulations, leading to increased influence of money in politics.
• Voting rights: Shelby County weakened federal oversight of voting practices, raising concerns about voter suppression.
• Religious freedom: Decisions like Hobby Lobby expanded religious exemptions, sparking debates about religious freedom versus individual rights.

Scholars have offered varying critiques, arguing his approach undermines established precedents and disregards evolving societal norms. However, his supporters see his decisions as a return to foundational constitutional principles.

Chief Justice John Roberts' Pragmatism and Influence

Chief Justice Roberts occupies a unique position, balancing his own judicial philosophy with the need to maintain the Court's legitimacy. While generally considered conservative, he has demonstrated a willingness to compromise and occasionally side with the liberal justices.

Balancing Act

Roberts' role as Chief Justice requires navigating the often-polarized political climate. He has sought to maintain a semblance of judicial restraint and avoid overtly partisan decisions.

• National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius (2012): Roberts joined the liberal justices to uphold the Affordable Care Act's individual mandate, using the taxing power as justification.
• King v. Burwell (2015): Roberts again sided with the liberal wing to save the Affordable Care Act from another potential challenge.

These decisions highlight Roberts' pragmatic approach, prioritizing the stability of the Court over strict adherence to ideological consistency. His leadership style emphasizes consensus-building, but his motivations in these instances remain a topic of debate.

Impact on Judicial Process

Roberts' influence extends beyond individual case decisions. He has actively shaped the Court's internal processes.

• Controlling the docket: Roberts plays a significant role in determining which cases the Court hears.
• Managing the Court's workload: He oversees the Court's administrative functions and ensures efficient operations.

His leadership style has also affected the public's perception of the Court. While some argue he has worked to maintain its legitimacy, others criticize his decisions as compromises that lack consistent principle.

The Alito and Roberts Courts: A Comparative Analysis

While both Justices are generally considered conservative, their approaches to judicial decision-making differ.

Shared Ideological Ground

Alito and Roberts share a broad conservative judicial philosophy. Both show a preference for textualism and originalism in constitutional interpretation, leading to agreement in many cases.

• Emphasis on limited government: Both justices generally favor a narrower interpretation of federal power.
• Respect for precedent (to a degree): While not always consistent, both express a general respect for legal precedent.

Differing Approaches

Despite their shared conservative ideology, their approaches show subtle yet crucial differences.

• Roberts' pragmatism vs. Alito's consistency: Roberts demonstrates a greater willingness to compromise and seek consensus, whereas Alito exhibits a more consistent and uncompromising conservative stance.
• Differing approaches to precedent: While both respect precedent, Alito shows less hesitation in overturning prior decisions deemed incompatible with his interpretation.

Collective Impact on American Law

The combined influence of Alito and Roberts has profoundly reshaped American law over the past two decades.

• Shift towards conservative jurisprudence: Their decisions have demonstrably shifted the Court’s trajectory towards a more conservative interpretation of the Constitution.
• Significant impact on social and political issues: Their rulings have directly affected highly contentious social issues such as abortion, campaign finance, and voting rights, leading to significant societal impacts.

Their collective impact will continue to shape legal debates and interpretations for years to come.

Reflecting on Two Decades of Alito and Roberts

In conclusion, Justices Alito and Roberts have left an undeniable mark on the Supreme Court. Alito's unwavering conservative approach and his pivotal role in landmark cases have significantly shifted the balance of the Court. Roberts, while sharing a conservative viewpoint, has demonstrated a pragmatic approach, balancing his own judicial philosophy with a keen awareness of the Court's image and institutional stability. Their combined influence has profoundly shaped American law, leading to significant changes across various areas. The long-term implications of their decisions will continue to be debated and analyzed for decades to come. Learn more about the legacies of Alito and Roberts and deepen your understanding of the Alito and Roberts era by exploring further resources and engaging in thoughtful discussions. Continue exploring the impact of Alito and Roberts on the Supreme Court.