Rule of Four

Definition

The Rule of Four is a principle used by the Supreme Court in determining which cases to hear. It states that a case will be granted a writ of certiorari and heard by the Court if at least four of the nine Justices vote to do so, even if the other five Justices would have denied the petition.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The Rule of Four is a long-standing tradition in the Supreme Court, dating back to the early 20th century.
2. It allows the Court to hear cases that may not have the support of the majority, but are deemed important by a significant minority of the Justices.
3. The Rule of Four is seen as a way to ensure that the Court hears a diverse range of cases and does not become too insular or conservative in its decision-making.
4. The Rule of Four is not explicitly stated in the Constitution or any federal statutes, but is rather a self-imposed rule that the Court has adopted over time.
5. The Rule of Four is considered an important safeguard against the tyranny of the majority, as it allows minority viewpoints to be heard and considered by the Court.

Review Questions

• Explain the purpose and significance of the Rule of Four in the Supreme Court's decision-making process.
  • The Rule of Four is a crucial principle that allows the Supreme Court to hear cases that may not have the support of the majority of Justices, but are deemed important by at least four of them. This ensures that the Court hears a diverse range of cases and does not become too insular or conservative in its decision-making. The Rule of Four is seen as a safeguard against the tyranny of the majority, as it allows minority viewpoints to be heard and considered by the Court. By granting a writ of certiorari with just four votes, the Rule of Four ensures that the Court can address important legal issues that may not have the support of the majority, but are nonetheless significant enough to warrant the Court's attention.
• Analyze how the Rule of Four relates to the concept of judicial review and the Supreme Court's role in the system of checks and balances.
  • The Rule of Four is closely tied to the Supreme Court's power of judicial review, which allows it to review the actions of the other branches of government and declare them unconstitutional. By granting a writ of certiorari with just four votes, the Rule of Four ensures that the Court can exercise this important power even when the majority of Justices may not see a particular case as a priority. This allows the Court to serve as a check on the other branches of government, as it can hear cases that may challenge the actions of the executive or legislative branches, even if those actions have the support of the majority. The Rule of Four, therefore, is an important safeguard that preserves the Supreme Court's role in the system of checks and balances, ensuring that it can fulfill its duty of judicial review and hold the other branches accountable.
• Evaluate the potential tensions and trade-offs that may arise from the application of the Rule of Four, particularly in terms of judicial discretion and the Court's legitimacy.
  • The Rule of Four, while an important safeguard, can also raise concerns about the balance between judicial discretion and the Court's legitimacy. By allowing a minority of Justices to grant a writ of certiorari, the Rule of Four gives a significant degree of judicial discretion to a small group of individuals. This could potentially lead to concerns about the Court's decision-making becoming too insular or influenced by the personal preferences of a few Justices, rather than being grounded in a broader consensus. Additionally, the Rule of Four may raise questions about the Court's legitimacy, as its decisions could be perceived as being made by a narrow minority rather than the majority. This tension between judicial discretion and legitimacy is an ongoing challenge that the Court must navigate, as it seeks to balance its role as an independent arbiter of the Constitution with the need to maintain public trust and confidence in its decisions.

Related terms

Writ of Certiorari: A writ issued by a higher court to a lower court, requiring the lower court to deliver the record in a case for review.

Judicial Review:

The power of the courts to review the actions of the other branches of government and declare them unconstitutional.

Judicial Discretion: The authority of judges to make decisions based on their own judgment and conscience within the limits of the law.