Why might a court wait...?

Question

If the supreme court wants to make a new law on an issue and decides that the new law wont take place for a full year what would be that reason to wait?

Yes I know this stems from a case that has already been brought to them. I just didnt want to bore readers with the whole case.

Answer 1

I can't speak for the American situation, but in Canada the Supreme Court (up here, they're nicknamed "The Supremes") has substantially altered the law from time to time and given the people affected by that change time to comply.

Answer 2

The Supreme Court cannot just decide to make a new law on an issue. No court in the US can.

For a court to rule on a legal issue, a specific case dealing with that issue must be brought before them. It must be a real "case or controversy" (quoting Article III of the Constitution) meaning that it must be an actual issue of contention between actual parties.

And those parties must have standing, meaning that someone cannot bring a suit to challenge a law unless they are harmed by the law.

Until a law is enforced, a person cannot be harmed by it, so could not have standing to bring the law suit. There are exceptions, but that's the general rule.

That's why a lawsuit can only be filed after the law has gone into effect, and after someone has been directly and personally affected by that law.

Answer 3

First of all, courts don't make laws. They can interpret them and change them so they are constitutional. They may delay their decision by a year in order to give society or the government time to adjust, or to file appeals if possible.

Answer 4

They have already decided it's a good idea, now they ahve to wade through cases, check that it's a good idea in general, in most cases, and which specific cases don't stand to gain from it, all the technicalities etc.