Q & A
1. What is the difference between a constitutional republic and a democracy?
One popular accusation often heard today by politicians of their opponents is that if they are elected, their proposed agenda would pose a serious threat to our democracy. In the most recent presidential election, it was commonplace to hear such attacks leveled in the media or along the campaign trail. Republicans and Democrats alike espouse rhetorical claims that the most partisan arm of the other party presents a threat to our democracy.
One recent poll conducted by pollsters from both the Republican and Democrat camp found that a shocking 81% of respondents stated that they believe democracy in America is currently being threatened, 72% agreeing with that statement strongly.
Our 250-year experiment in self-government in the U.S. has survived periods of sharp polarization despite similar claims by political commentators over the years. One reason is perhaps for our government’s endurance is that we do not operate under a system of democracy. Ours is a constitutional republic. A constitutional republic is form of government in which the country is governed by the people (mostly through representatives) from which all governing power is formally derived by a written constitution. A “democracy” is a broad term that refers to a system of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly. In a true democratic form of government, the majority vote on a given issue determines political outcomes.
2. What happens when there is a tie vote on the Supreme Court?
Occasionally, but rarely, a situation arises when the Supreme Court is deadlocked in a tie vote in their decision on a case. But wait, you may say. How can this be when there are nine justices on the Court? This occurs most often when there is a vacancy on the bench or one justice recuses themself due to a conflict of interest. Then this happens, the decision of the lower court is upheld.
In one high profile case to reach the Court recently, the state of Oklahoma passed a law allowing religious organizations like the Catholic church to form under a charter, public-funded school. In Oklahoma Statewide Charter School Board v. Dummond, Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself for reasons that she never publicly disclosed. This resulted in an evenly divided 4-4 decision by the court, which had the effect of affirming the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling banning publicly-funded religious charter schools as a violation of the constitution’s establishment clause forbidding entanglement between the government and religion.
Larry L. Crain, www.crainlaw.legal
