institutions of government unit 4, part iii: judicial branch 35-45%
TRANSCRIPT
Institutions of GovernmentUnit 4, Part III: Judicial Branch
35-45%
Evolution of the Judiciary
Role of the Judicial Branch• interpret the law
Intent of the Framers• judges explain and apply existing
laws• expected judicial review but not
such a big stake in policy making• federal judges have became
more activist over time and retained authority to create policy • liberal judges tend to be more
activist and conservative tend to be more strict
• judge can be both conservative and activist and liberal and strict
Evolution of the Judiciary
1789 to 1861• federal v. state authority• interstate commerce under
federal authority• state law conflicting with
federal law void
• Marbury v. Madison, 1803• Judicial review
• McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819• federal authority interpreted
broadly
Evolution of the Judiciary
1865 to 1936• economic authority of state
and federal governments• narrow interpretation of 14th
and 15th amendments• segregation• poll taxes• Plessy v. Ferguson, 1896
• private property protected by 14th amendment
Evolution of the Judiciary
1936 to the present• political liberty• court packing plan (FDR)• Court defers to legislature for
economic regulation• Warren Court established civil
liberties• incorporation of Bill of Rights• in 1990s, the Court allowed
states to resist some federal authority
Selecting Justices
Presidential Nomination• All federal judges require
senate approval• the process is partisan • delays in approval leave
vacancies in appellate and district courts
Senatorial Courtesy• nominees for federal courts
receive approval from senators of that state if they are from the President’s party
Selecting Justices
Litmus Test• President looks for
justices that share ideology
• concern that ideology too dominant and senate approval slower
Structure of the Federal Courts
Legislative Courts• created to help
Congress carry out expressed powers
• judges have fixed terms and can be removed • Tax Court• Military Court
Structure of the Federal Courts
Constitutional Courts• shoulder workload
with the Supreme Court under Article III
• judges have life terms and can be impeached but not removed• District Courts (94)• Courts of Appeals (12)
Structure of the Federal Courts
Judiciary Act, 1789• est. Supreme Court
with six justices • created 13 judicial
districts • created traveling
“circuit” courts• created Attorney
General
Structure of the Federal Courts
Federal District Courts• 89 districts in 50 states, 1
in D.C., 1 in Puerto Rico (632 judges)
• life term - $140,000 • hear 80% of federal
workload (300,000 cases per year)
• criminal and civil cases that do not create new public policy
• regularly use jury
Structure of the Federal Courts
Federal Courts of Appeal (12)• 179 justices serve in 12 courts• all 50 states and territories
divided into 11 districts plus one in D.C.
• life term• hear 19% of federal workload
(30,000 cases per year)• typically sit in panels of three
with no jury• more difficult cases demanding
interpretation of Constitution
Federal Jurisdiction
Dual-Court System• cases fall under state and/or
federal jurisdiction
Federal Jurisdiction• federal jurisdiction applies
for two factors1. subject matter
• case involves federal laws, treaties, or the Constitution
2. parties involved• case involves federal
government • diversity cases: different states
or citizens of different states
Federal Jurisdiction
Multiple Jurisdiction• if both federal and state
laws have been broken
State Courts• State court – state
Supreme Court – Supreme Court
• State court rulings may still be appealed to the Supreme Court
Supreme Court
State Supreme Court
State Court
Supreme Court
State Supreme Court Appeals Court
District CourtState Court
Line of Jurisdiction
Federal Jurisdiction
Standing• personal harm must be
demonstrated • sovereign immunity • historically only
citizens can challenge the government• Worcester v. Georgia• Dred Scott v. Sandford,
1857
Road to the Supreme Court
Rule of Four• takes four Supreme Court
justices to issue a writ of certiorari
• only about 100 cases heard each year by the Supreme Court• most cases rejected by the
courts • leaves diversity of
constitutional interpretation across the nation
Road to the Supreme Court
Reasons for Writ of Cert• significant
Federal/Constitutional question
• conflicting decisions by lower courts
• clarifying or reversal of Constitution interpretation made by lower court
The Supreme Court in Action
Presentations to the Court• each side of a case submits a brief• this is a summary of the case plus
case precedent• justices can question you during that
time
solicitor general• represents the U.S. before the
Supreme Court• gets to review cases before they get to
Supreme Court (has influence)
amicus curiae• a brief submitted by an uninvolved
party
The Supreme Court in Action
Deliberations• John Roberts, the
chief justice, speaks first and votes last
• each of the nine justices gets one vote
• reasoning for the case is summarized as an opinion
The Court Today
Sotomayor, Breyer, Alito, KaganThomas, Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Ginsberg
Elena Kagan•born in NY in 1960•Princeton University•Worcester College•Oxford University•dean of Harvard Law•Obama – 2010
Sonia Sotomayor•born in Bronx in 1954•Princeton University•Assistant DA in NYC•2nd Court of Appeals•Obama – 2009
Samuel Alito, Jr.•born in NJ in 1950•Princeton University•Yale Law•Assistant US Attorney•3rd Court of Appeals•Bush – 2006
Stephen Breyer•born in SF in 1938•Stanford University•Oxford•Harvard Law School•1st Court of Appeals•Clinton – 1994
Ruth Bader Ginsberg•born in NY in 1933•Cornell, BA•Harvard Law•Columbia Law•DC Court of Appeals •Clinton – 1993
Clarence Thomas•born in GA in 1948•Holy Cross College•Yale Law School•DC Court of Appeals•Bush – 1991
Anthony M. Kennedy•born in CA in 1936•Stanford University•London School of Economics•Harvard Law•9th Court of Appeals•Reagan – 1988
Antonin Scalia•born in NJ in 1936•Georgetown University•University of Fribourg•Harvard Law •DC Court of Appeals•Reagan – 1986
John G. Roberts, Jr.•born in NY in 1955•Harvard College•Harvard Law•DC Court of Appeals•Bush – 2005
The Supreme Court in Action
majority opinion• explanation of courts
decision (considered as important as the decision itself)
concurring opinion• gives other reasoning for
the majority decision (considered as important as the decision itself)
dissenting opinion• explains an alternative
understanding of the case
The Power of the Federal Courts
Measures of Judicial Power• over 130 laws have been
declared unconstitutional • since 1810, over 260 cases
have been overturned
stare decisis• “to stand by things decided” • lawyers reference previous
decisions of the court similar in circumstances or content to the case at hand
The Power of the Federal Courts
Checks on Judicial Power• courts rely on others to implement
their decisions • South after Brown v. Board• Jackson and Indian Removal
• overturning Supreme Court decisions1. revising legislation2. amending the Constitution 3. future Supreme Court decisions4. altering the jurisdiction of the courts
(changing boundaries)5. changing number of justices
Policy-making Power of the Courts
Judicial Activism• making a ruling that creates a
new policy for the entire nation
• this has increased over the years • Roe vs. Wade, 1973 • Gideon vs. Wainwright, 1963
• when a justice’s personal convictions ignore the rule of law• declaring a law unconstitutional
when it is not• upholding an unconstitutional law• overturning a standing precedent
(Bush v. Gore, 2000)
Policy-making Power of the Courts
Arguments for activism1.the other two branches are
too politically biased, only the courts are able to make fair, objective policy
2.streamlines the process, because judges aren’t bogged down by the lawmaking process
Policy-making Power of the Courts
Judicial Restraint• courts should merely
review actions of the other two branches
Policy-making Power of the Courts
Arguments for Restraint1. courts are not accountable
(not elected)2. lawmaking is strictly the
job of the legislative branch who are elected specifically for that purpose
3. judges lack the expertise to create and manage policy
Policy-making Power of the Courts
• Public Opinion and the Courts• outside the pressure of
public opinion• affects judges when
getting appointed to the courts
• may affect public’s perception of the court’s legitimacy