1.
A written explanation by one or more justices that states the Court’s legal reasoning for its decision in a case.
2.
The official Court opinion joined by more than half of the justices; it announces the Court’s decision and the legal rationale that becomes binding precedent.
3.
A separate written opinion by a justice who agrees with the outcome of the case but wants to explain different or additional legal reasons.
4.
A written explanation by one or more justices who disagree with the majority’s decision and reasoning; it expresses an alternative legal view.
5.
An opinion issued when a majority agrees on the result but not on the same legal reasoning; it sets out the reasoning supported by the largest group of justices, but it has weaker precedential weight than a clear majority opinion.
6.
The Court’s formal determination about the legal question presented in the case — the outcome that resolves the parties’ dispute.
7.
another term for decision
8.
A legal principle or rule established by previous court decisions that judges use to decide future cases with similar facts or legal issues.
9.
The process by which judges and justices determine the meaning and application of laws and the Constitution in a specific case.
10.
Precedent from a higher court or an earlier controlling decision that lower courts must follow when deciding similar cases.
11.
A decision in which all justices agree on both the outcome and the reasoning; present a single, cohesive rationale for the ruling.
12.
A judicial philosophy holding that courts should narrowly interpret the law and avoid creating new policy
13.
A judicial philosophy that supports a more flexible, expansive role for courts, allowing judges to interpret and sometimes reshape laws or extend constitutional protections when necessary to address injustices or adapt to social change.
14.
A foundational legal document that establishes the structure of government and guarantees fundamental rights; courts interpret whether laws and government actions comply with it.
15.
— To create or change law; this phrase criticizes judges who, critics say, make policy through judicial rulings rather than leaving lawmaking to elected legislatures.
16.
Contrary to the provisions or principles of the constitution; a law or government action deemed invalid because it violates constitutional rights or limits.
17.
The constitutional principle that the government must treat similarly situated people or groups in the same manner; often invoked to challenge discriminatory laws or practices.
18.
The practice or policy of separating people based on characteristics such as race; historically enforced by law in some places until ruled unconstitutional in key court cases.
19.
Landmark Supreme Court case that ruled state-sponsored school segregation violated the Constitution’s equal protection guarantee, overturning a long-standing precedent and prompting broad social and legal change.
20.
When a court overturns a prior decision and replaces the earlier rule with a new one; reversal can reshape legal practice and is often controversial because it departs from established rulings
