The Significant Impact of Robert Dahl's Article, “Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy Maker », created for our reflection on The Supreme Court believes that it has largely opened the way to an illustration of the relationship between public opinion and the Supreme Court of the United States. Dahl was able to draw connections between the Supreme Court and the environment surrounding it so that others could better understand the fundamental aspects that link the two and explore the possible reasoning and potential outcomes of the Court. Dahl conducted his study on the decision. the creation of the Supreme Court and whether the Court exercised its power of judicial review to frustrate the will of the majority and protect the rights of minorities or whether it used its power to ratify the additional preferences of the dominant "national legislative majority" . Using the results of Dahl's study, he constructs numerous arguments throughout his article "Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as a National Policy Maker." In what follows, I will highlight and explain in detail each of the arguments that Dahl constructs in his article. After reviewing the results of his research, Dahl concluded that the Court was only rarely willing to counteract Congress's preferences by passing a law. According to Dahl, “the Supreme Court is inevitably part of the dominant national alliance. As part of the political leadership of the dominant alliance, the Court of course supports the main policies of the alliance” (293). This explains to readers that although the Supreme Court takes other branches of government into account to some extent, overall it attempts to act as its own branch when making decisions. Dahl also sought to understand whether or not...... middle of paper .... ...he would protect the rights of minorities and become a true promoter of social change. In conclusion, the Court is a somewhat constrained institution in that it only responds to the demands and whims of society. The Court's dependence on society for the initiation and execution of cases prevents it from issuing decisions completely opposed to the opinion of society, which is why the Court can never fully direct social change in the United States. Therefore, “at best, the Court operates to confer legitimacy, not only to the particular and parochial policies of the dominant alliance, but to the fundamental patterns of behavior required for the functioning of a democracy” (Dahl 295). ,Robert. 1957. “Decision Making in a Democracy: The Supreme Court as the National Policymaker.” » Journal of Public Law 6: 279-295.