The United States is sometimes known as a society of laws. The phrase reflects Americans' ability to conduct our business and personal affairs and to exercise the rights guaranteed to us by the U.S. Constitution against a background of predictable and peaceably enforceable legal norms. So accepted are these norms that they seem often to blend into the background, taken almost for granted until a dispute arises. When disputes do arise, Americans from all walks of life turn to their judicial system to adjudicate their legal rights and responsibilities.

The ultimate interpreter of American law and the American Constitution itself is the United States Supreme Court. Nearly 220 years old, the Court has grown dramatically in stature and authority. Unlike its early predecessors, today's Court largely controls its docket, choosing the cases it will hear. Its authority to invalidate as unconstitutional actions of the legislative and executive branches now is long settled. When Chief Justice John Marshall first asserted this prerogative in 1803, he had to consider whether the fledgling Court could enforce an unpopular decision; today, Americans may disagree—and often do—volubly and with great zest, with one or another of the Court's decisions, but defying the Court is simply beyond the bounds of political, even social, legitimacy.

We present a collection of essays in this journal that explain how the Court functions. They also illustrate how it commands the respect of Americans and plays a vital role in the constitutional system. We are fortunate to feature an introduction by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, and contributions by a number of the nation's premier legal scholars.

Professor A.E. Dick Howard of the University of Virginia outlines broadly the Supreme Court's role in the U.S. constitutional system at discrete points in American history. "What is the place of an unelected judiciary in a democracy?" he asks, affording us greater understanding of how Americans of different eras have answered that question.

Professor John Paul Jones of the University of Richmond explains Supreme Court jurisdiction—the Court must hear certain cases, may hear others, and may not address still others. This valuable primer stresses the Court's great adaptability, one key to its success.

Professor Robert S. Barker of Duquesne University explains the nomination and confirmation processes that govern appointments to the Court. While the president and Congress each have their say, the result has been a series of independent-minded justices.

The Honorable Peter J. Messitte, U.S. District Judge in the District of Maryland, demystifies the writ of certiorari, the legal device by which the Supreme Court chooses the appeals it will hear in a given term. Judge Messitte negotiates the applicable procedures and explains which kinds of cases are most likely to be selected.

Brown v. Board of Education, in which the Court declared unconstitutional the practice of segregating public schools by race, is possibly the most acclaimed Supreme Court decision of the 20th century. Jack Greenberg was one of the attorneys who argued that case for the African-American plaintiffs, and we are proud to offer his first-hand account of those historic arguments.

The nine justices could not discharge their duties without the assistance of numerous Court officials. Four of them—the Court clerk, the marshal, the reporter of decisions, and the public information officer—describe their jobs, backgrounds, and how they came to work for the Court.

We conclude this e-journal with brief summaries of landmark Supreme Court decisions, a bibliography, and a guide to Internet resources. We are pleased to offer this portrait of a quintessentially American institution.

The Editors