THE JUDICIARY

Early Days of the Supreme Court

• The Founders expected that the courts would have “judgment” about cases, that is, the power to resolve disputes brought before them; thus:• The courts were to be the “least dangerous”

branch;• The Supreme Court was not given a formal

home until 1935

Establishing Judicial Review

• Marbury v. Madison (1803) sets the precedent for the court to declare laws or actions of government officials unconstitutional:• The Constitution is seen as the supreme law of

the land and contradictory laws are unconstitutional;

• Judges can be trusted to interpret the Constitution because they take an oath to uphold it

National Supremacy

• McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) – the Court interprets the “necessary and proper” clause to allow Congress to legislate where its powers are not clear.

A Changing Court, I

• The Court reflected where its justices came from in the period of industrialization; thus the Court:• invalidated laws regulating child labor,

maximum hours of work, and minimum wages;• limited both workers joining unions and unions

from striking;• also limited antitrust laws

A Changing Court, II

• Roosevelt’s court-packing plan (1936) causes the Supreme Court to protect itself by going along with presidential initiatives.

A Changing Court, III

• The Warren Court (1953-1969) – brought about significant changes in:

• civil rights and liberties;

• criminal defendants’ rights;

• reapportionment

A Changing Court, IV

• The Burger (1969-1986) and Rehnquist courts (1986-2005) proved to be more conservative:• Uncertain about whether to eliminate liberal

doctrine;• Conflicts among conservatives led to a

divided court;• Changes made to legal doctrine instead

Structure of the Courts, I

• The District Courts:

• 94 courts, 1 for each state;

• Multiple judges, although only one judge or jury decides a case;

• Trial-level courts

Structure of the Courts, II

• The Courts of Appeal:

• 12 courts based on regions of the country called circuits;

• Intermediate appellate courts;

• Panels of three judges decide cases

Jurisdiction

• The authority to hear and decide cases:

• Federal courts – cases in which the subject involves the US Constitution, statutes, or treaties; maritime law; cases in which litigants include the US government, state governments, and/or citizens;

• State courts – cases involving criminal matters in the states

Judges

• Senatorial courtesy – senators of the president’s party recommend or veto candidates from their state for judgeships in their states;

• The Senate Judiciary Committee – the battleground for controversial nominations

Presidential Criteria

• Usually someone from the president’s party;

• Ideological views of the candidate;

• Diversity on the courts

Tenure of Judges

• Serving “during good behavior” judges and justices can only be removed by impeachment for “high crimes and misdemeanors”

Independence of Judges

• Presidents may try to influence individual judges/justices but generally judges/justices vote as they see fit:

• One-quarter of judges/justices deviate from presidential expectations;

• Presidents who carefully search for candidate usually get who they want

Access to the Courts

• Types of court cases:

• Criminal cases – those in which government prosecutes persons for violating the law;

• Civil cases – those in which persons sue others for denying their rights and causing them harm

Wealth Discrimination in Access

• Money often determines whether you have sufficient or effective representation in court.

Interest Groups Help in Access

• About half of all Supreme Court cases involve a liberal or conservative interest group. Types of groups:

• The ACLU;

• The NAACP;

• The Rutherford Institute

How a Case Gets to the Courts

• Cases usually start in district courts;

• Cases then may proceed on appeal to the Appellate courts;

• Appeals may be taken to the Supreme Court;

• Or, the Supreme Court may decide to hear a case itself and issue a writ of certiorari

Deciding Cases

• Courts may either interpret statutes or interpret the Constitution;

• Judges/justices generally exercise discretion in deciding cases

Approaches to the Law

• Restrained judges – see the judiciary as the least democratic branch and therefore accept the laws and actions of the other branches rather than substitute their own views;

• Activist judges – less concerned with deference and proper procedures, do not see the courts as undemocratic, and claim that declaring laws unconstitutional enhances the law

Following Precedents

• Stare decisis – “stand by what has been decided”, meaning that the courts goes along with decisions from previous cases:• Provides stability in the law;• Judges/justices still exercise discretion in

choosing which precedents to follow

Cases at the Supreme Court• Briefs, or written arguments are

submitted;• The Court holds oral arguments;• Lawyers present their arguments with

justices frequently interrupting;• Each side has a half hour• Friday conferences are held to discuss

cases;• Opinions are assigned and written to try

and influence supporters;• Votes are eventually taken and other

opinions written

The Use of Judicial Review

• Over 150 provisions of federal laws;

• Over 1,200 provisions of state and local laws;

• Judicial review has been used sparingly and the Court has ignored many issue-areas

Checks on the Courts

• Presidents may appoint new judges when vacancies occur;

• Presidents may refuse to enforce court rulings but also may run into public pressure to do so;

• Congress may overturn court rulings through constitutional amendments, but this is difficult

• The Founders did not intend for the courts to be responsive to the public;

• The courts are part of the political process, and are sensitive to it

Role of the courts in American government

• Make policy• Can undo work of representative

institutions• Judicial Activism or Judicial Restraint?• Constitutional advocates?• Bush v. Gore• Citizens United v. FEC

Conferral of power on federal courts

• Constitution

• Judiciary Act of 1789– The Act set the number of Supreme Court

justices at six: one Chief Justice and five Associate Justices.

– The Act also created 13 judicial districts within the 11 states that had then ratified the Constitution

– This Act established a circuit court and district court in each judicial district

• The Act created the Office of Attorney General, whose primary responsibility was to represent the United States before the Supreme court. The Act also created a United States Attorney and a United States Marshal for each judicial district

– A clause granting the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus (we command) outside its appellate jurisdiction was declared unconstitutional by Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803), one of the seminal cases in American law. Thus, the Judiciary Act of 1789 was the first act of Congress to be partially invalidated by the Supreme Court.

– The Judiciary Act of 1789 included the Alien Tort Statute which provides jurisdiction in the district courts over lawsuits by aliens for torts (civil wrongs) in violation of the law of nations or treaties of the United States.

• Marbury v. Madison

• Judicial review

Judicial review of presidential actions

• U.S. v Nixon• U.S. v. NYT• Gitmo?

Judicial review of state laws

Organization of Federal Courts today

U.S. District Courts

• 94• Trial court• Civil cases• Criminal cases• Most settle out of court

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals

• 12 regional courts• 13th court

Federal court of appeals(cont.)

• Panel of 3• Opinion writing• Stare decisis

Supreme Court

• Equal justice under the law while making justice the guardian of liberty

• Jurisdiction: original and appellate

Supreme Court (continued)

• Control over docket (rule of four)• Solicitor general• Amicus curiae brief• Grant review• Oral arguments• Conference• Judgment• Chief justice

COURT SYSTEM

How does a person become a judge?

• Nominations - Senate Judiciary committee

• Senatorial courtesy• Political ideology• Supreme Court Justices

SCOTUS

U.S. Supreme Court 2010

Supreme Court of the United States

• Supreme Court is the ultimate court of appeals in the United States.

• Usually this is determined by the rule of law or process..not the merit of the case.

• Their power to hear a case is discretionary and they do not have to give any reason for refusing to hear a case from their docket.

SCOTUS

• If the Supreme Court chooses to hear a case, the lower court ruling stands.

• If they chose to not a hear a case, they do not have to give any rationale for why why they have chosen not to hear the case..but sometimes they do.

Session

• First Monday of October each year and usually continues in session through June.

• Receives and disposes of approximately 5,000 cases a year.– A) Subject matter is not proper.– B) Subject matter is not sufficient to

warrant a review of the full Court.

Session

• Cases are heard with all the Justices sitting together in open court.

• Each year the Supreme Court hears about 150 cases of national importance and 3/4ths of such decisions are announced in full published opinions.

• Majority, Concurring, and Dissenting Opinions

U.S. Supreme Court

• Located in back of the U.S. Capitol Building

U.S. Supreme Court

John G. Roberts, Jr.

• Chief Justice• Born in 1955 (54)• J.D. Harvard Law• U.S. Court of

Appeals for DC in 2003 (GWB)

• George W. Bush nominated him C.J in 2005 [78-22]

• Roman Catholic

Antonin Scalia

• Associate Justice• Born in 1936 (73)• LL.B Harvard• U.S. Court of

Appeals D.C. in 1982 (Reagan)

• Ronald Reagan nominated him in 1986 [98-0]

• Roman Catholic

Anthony M. Kennedy

• Associate Justice• Born in 1936 (73)• LL.B Harvard• U.S. Court of

Appeals 9th Circuit in 1975 (Ford)

• Ronald Reagan nominated him in 1988 [97-0]

• Roman Catholic

Clarence Thomas

• Associate Justice• Born in 1948 (61)• J.D. Yale• U.S. Court of

Appeals D.C. in 1980 (GHWB)

• George H.W. Bush nominated him in 1991 [52-48]

• Roman Catholic

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

• Associate Justice• Born in 1933 (76)• LL.B Columbia• U.S. Court of

Appeals D.C. in 1980 (Carter)

• Bill Clinton nominated her in 1993 [96-3]

• Jewish

Steven G. Breyer

• Associate Justice• Born in 1938 (71)• LL.B. Harvard• U.S. Court of

Appeals D.C. in 1980 (Carter)

• Bill Clinton nominated him in 1994 [87-9]

• Jewish

Samuel A. Alito, Jr.

• Associate Justice• Born in 1950 (59)• J.D. Yale• U.S. Court of

Appeals 3rd Circuit in 1990 (GHWB)

• George W. Bush nominated in 2006 [58-42]

• Roman Catholic

Sonia Sotomayor

• Associate Justice• Born in 1954 (55)• J.D. Yale• U.S Court of

Appeals 2nd Circuit in 1998 (Clinton)

• Barack Obama nominated in 2009 [68-31]

• Roman Catholic

Elena Kagan

• Associate Justice• Born in 1960 (50)• J.D. Harvard• Initially appointed but

not confirmed to U.S. Court of Appeals (D.C.) (Clinton) expired

• U.S Solicitor General of the U.S. (Obama)

• Barack Obama nominated in 2010 [63-37]

• Judaism

U.S. Supreme Court 2010

The Roberts Court, 2010Back row (left to right): Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen G. Breyer, Samuel A. Alito, and Elena Kagan. Front row (left to right): Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Anthony Kennedy, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Justices of the Supreme Court

• Nine Justices led by a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. His/her main duty is administrational and ceremonial.

• Nomination and confirmation can sometimes become very “political”

• Conservative, Moderate, Liberal• Republican to Republican appointees• Democrat to Democrat appointees• Almost always…

Federal system

• 94 district courts: criminal and civil cases

• 13 appeals courts: appellate• Justices - on for life• 1 Supreme Court - Judicial review

– Marbury v. Madison

SCOTUS

Consequences of Judicial Decisions

• Others to implement its policies• Longest legacy of U.S. President?• John Paul Stevens appointed by

Ford and recently resigned under Obama

• Liberal and Conservative Cycles

School prayer

• Engle vs. Vitale• Wallace v. Jaffree• Pledge of Allegiance

Desegregation of Schools

• Brown vs Board of Education• Swann v. Charlotte-Meckelennburg

Board of Ed.

Abortion

• Roe v Wade• Webster v Reproductive Services• Planned Parenthood v Casey• Partial birth abortion

JurisdictionUnit IV

U.S. ConstitutionU.S. Constitution

• Constitutional right violation such as freedom of speech, religion, or other related to Constitutional Articles I-VII and Amendments

• Examples-– Flag Burning– Executive Branch– Mall of America– Capital punishment of 8 year-old

Federal LawsFederal Laws

• Federal crimes such as tax evasion, kidnapping, bank robbery or any laws created by Congress or Executive Agencies

• Examples-– Crime crossing a state or international border– Checking constitutionality of local, state, and

federal laws

Admiralty and Maritime Admiralty and Maritime LawsLaws

• Concerns or crimes that occur on the high seas, related to the seas, or international waters

• Examples-– Shipwrecks– Pirates– Drug traffic– Zebra Mussels– Asian Carp

Disputes where the U.S. is Disputes where the U.S. is involvedinvolved

• Examples– Violation of government contracts– Involvement of government property– Italian Gondola Accident– Nuclear Testing– Japanese Internment– IRS

Controversies between Controversies between StatesStates

• Examples-– Disputes over milk prices– Pollution from factories– Interstate system– Hwy 36 Bridge– Asian Carp

Controversies between Controversies between Citizens of different StatesCitizens of different States

• Examples-– Interstate commerce– Product bought somewhere else in

U.S.– Jurisdiction limit to case involving

$50,000 or more

Disputes involving Foreign Disputes involving Foreign GovernmentsGovernments

• Examples-– Case involving international law – Citizen or company

* However, American businesses and U.S. Citizens and Permanent Residents must respect laws and practices of other nations as they do ours

U.S. Ambassadors, Ministers, and U.S. Ambassadors, Ministers, and Consuls serving in Foreign CountriesConsuls serving in Foreign Countries

• American citizen working for the American government violates American law in a foreign country

• May be legal in respective country but employee may be liable for actions in U.S. Court system

• Usually high civilian officials

Jurisdiction Jurisdiction

• Under most of these situations, the Federal Court System has Exclusive Jurisdiction

• Eight District Courts- Downtown Mpls.

• SCOTUS has the final say…if they want to…

Functions of Judicial Functions of Judicial BranchBranch

• Guardian of & interprets U.S. Constitution

• Make sure laws applied fairly• Help preserve order in society

• Goal of the court system is to provide equal justice for all.

• Some more equal than others?

Landmark CasesUnit IV

Marbury v. Madison 1803Marbury v. Madison 1803

• Created the concept of “judicial review” which allows the Supreme Court to declare the actions or Acts of Congress as unconstitutional

• 9-0• Federal separation of powers and

checks established

Fletcher v. Peck 1810Fletcher v. Peck 1810

• Supreme Court ruled a state law unconstitutional, the decision also helped create a growing precedent for the sanctity of legal contracts, and hinted that Native Americans did not hold title to their own lands [9-0]

• Georgia claimed possession of the Yazoo lands, a 35-million-acre region of the Indian Reserve west of its own territory. This land later became the states of Alabama and Mississippi

• Contract Clause of Constitution / Private Property

McCulloch v. Maryland McCulloch v. Maryland 18191819

• McCulloch, head of the Baltimore Branch of the Second Bank of the United States, refused to pay the tax. State of Maryland argued that "the Constitution is silent on the subject of banks.” [9-0]

• Court invoked the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution which allowed the Federal government to pass laws not expressly provided for in the Constitution's list of express powers provided those laws are in useful furtherance of the express powers of Congress under the Constitution.

• Federal government v. States’ Rights

Johnson v. MJohnson v. M’’Intosh 1823Intosh 1823

• U.S. Supreme Court that held that private citizens could not purchase lands from Native Americans.

• Doctrine of aboriginal title in the United States, and the related “discovery doctrine”

• Marshall traced the outlines of the the United States government inherited the British right of preemption over Indian lands. The legal result is that the only Indian conveyances of land which can create valid title are sales of land to the federal government.

Indian Removal Act of Indian Removal Act of 18301830

• The Removal Act paved the way for the reluctant—and often forcible—emigration of tens of thousands of American Indians to the West.

• Cherokee Nation v. Georgia (1831)• Worcester v. Georgia (1832) – tribal

sovereignty• Jackson’s response---let him

enforce it

Dred Scott v. Sanford Dred Scott v. Sanford 18571857

• Ruled Congress could not prohibit slavery in the United States territories and that enslaved African-Americans and their descendants were not U.S. Citizens. [7-2]

• Dred Scott traveled into a “free soil” state with his master. The issues for the Supreme Court were citizenship and property rights.

• Impact- – Struck down Missouri Compromise Act– “ Free soil” unconstitutional– State’s Rights

Civil Rights Act of 1875Civil Rights Act of 1875

• Supreme Court strikes down as “unconstitutional”

• 14th Amendment prohibits States from equal protection

• No protection from private discrimination

Plessy v. Ferguson 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson 1896

Established the “separate but equal” doctrine making public segregation of Blacks and Whites legal. [8-1]

• Impact-– Legalized separation of everything– Schools, public buildings, hotels, etc.– Reaffirmed unconstitutional elements of

Civil Rights Act of 1875 (private)

Lochner v.NY 1905Lochner v.NY 1905

• Supreme Court case that held a "liberty of contract" was implicit in the due process clause of the 14th Am [5-4]

• NY law limited the number of hours that a baker could work each day to ten, and limited the number of hours that a baker could work each week to 60.

• Labor law attempting to regulate the terms of employment, and calling it an "unreasonable, unnecessary and arbitrary interference with the right and liberty of the individual to contract

• Laissez-faire / Liberty of contract

Schenck v. United States Schenck v. United States 19191919

• Held that free speech could be limited if there was a “clear and present danger” that illegal action might result from speech. [9-0]

• Conspiracy to violate 1917 Espionage Act by causing and attempting to cause insubordination and obstruction of recruitment and enlistment service.

• Impact-– Declaration of war suspends certain civil liberties

Adkins v. Childrens Adkins v. Childrens Hospital 1923Hospital 1923

• Supreme Court opinion holding that federal minimum wage legislation for women was an unconstitutional infringement of liberty of contract, as protected by the due process clause of the Fifth Amendment.

• Adkins was overturned in West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish (1937)

• Liberty of contract / Laissez faire

New Deal ActsNew Deal Acts

• "First New Deal" (1933) and a "Second New Deal" (1934–36). Supreme Court declared some unconstitutional and others were repealed during World War II. [5-4]

• "First New Deal" (1933) dealt with groups; from banking and railroads to industry and farming

• Wagner Act to promote labor unions, the Works Progress Administration (WPA), the Social Security Act, and new programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers.

• Laissez faire / Liberty of contract/ Court packing

West Coast Hotel v. West Coast Hotel v. Parrish 1937Parrish 1937

• Supreme Court upholds Washington minimum wage law [5-4]

• Court surrenders to New Deal• Constitutional Revolution• Government can regulate• People legislate, not courts

Brown v. Board of Ed. Brown v. Board of Ed. 19541954

• Established precedent that “separate but equal” doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was not equal. [9-0]

• NAACP case in Topeka, Kansas• Impact-

– Desegregation of all public schools and later public spaces

– Civil Rights Movement– Bussing and Affirmative Action

Griffin v. Prince Edward Griffin v. Prince Edward County 1964County 1964

• Supreme Court ruled that the County School Board of Prince Edward County's decision to close all local, public schools and provide vouchers to attend private schools were declared constitutionally impermissible and violations under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment. [9-0]

• Federal government to protect individuals from ANY government action

Baker v. CarrBaker v. Carr 1962 1962

• Deciding that reapportionment issues present justiciable questions, thus enabling federal courts to intervene in and to decide reapportionment cases. The defendants unsuccessfully argued that reapportionment of legislative districts is a "political question", and hence not a question that may be resolved by federal courts. [6-2]

• Resident v. Carr (Secretary of State) Tennessee• Impact

– One person, one vote– Shaw v. Reno (1993)

Engel v. Vitale Engel v. Vitale 19621962

• Determined that it is unconstitutional for state officials to compose an official school prayer and require its recitation in public schools. [6-1]

• Opening the school day with such a prayer violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution (as applied to the states through the Fourteenth)

• "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The governments of twenty-two states signed on to an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief.

• Wallace v. Jaffre (1985)

Gideon v. Wainwright Gideon v. Wainwright 1963 1963

• Declared that a person accused of a crime regardless of the offense had right to legal counsel during a trial. The Supreme Court previously in Betts v. Brady (1942) ruled that counsel only was for federal courts and capital punishment. [9-0]

• Clarence Gideon broke into a pool hall and stole some food and coins. Gideon was sent to prison.

Gideon (continued)Gideon (continued)

• Impact-– Sixth Amendment reaffirmed– Everyone is entitled to legal defense– Economic discrimination?– Escobedo v. Illinois (1964) would make it

possible for legal defense from the questioning phase. Discretionary…

– $$$

Miranda v. Arizona 1966Miranda v. Arizona 1966

• Ruled that police must inform you of your Constitutional Rights at the time of arrest. [5-4]

• Impact-– “Miranda Law” --You have the ….– Supreme Court recently revised but very

few police departments have changed their processing for fear of losing a conviction

Tinker v. Des Moines 1969Tinker v. Des Moines 1969

• Ruled three public school students were able to wear armbands to protest the Vietnam War as long as the protest did not “materially and substantially interfere with appropriate discipline and operation of school.” [7-2]

• Impact-– Student speech (Public schools)– Dress codes

Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburgh Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburgh

19701970

• Reinforced the Brown v. Board decision to integrate students of color into neighboring schools. Public schools can and must according to Swann make strides to achieve racial balance of a school’s population. [9-0]

• Impact-– Bussing of students– Integration of students (urban to suburban)– Northwest Suburban Integration

NY Times v. United States NY Times v. United States 19711971

• Held that prior restraint or censorship was unconstitutional unless the government could prove serious and immediate harm to nation. [6-3]

• The Pentagon Papers• The Government wanted to stop the

Washington Post and NY Times from publishing contents of a classified study on Vietnam

• Impact-– First Amendment– Immediate harm to nation

Furman v. Georgia 1972Furman v. Georgia 1972

• Death penalty was found to be applied in a discriminatory manner against ethnic minorities and indigents and Court barred states from carrying out any further executions. [5-4]

• See Gregg v. Georgia 1976• Impact-

– Limitation of 8th Amendment

Roe v. Wade 1972Roe v. Wade 1972

• Legalized the right of women to an abortion under certain circumstances. States were allowed to regulate in later trimesters. “Viability” is the determining factor. [5-4]

• Impact-– Pro-Life– Pro-Choice– Mother’s rights v. Child/Fetus’ rights– Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992)

U.S. v. Richard M. Nixon U.S. v. Richard M. Nixon 19741974

• Established that the President’s claim of Executive Privilege in cases of military or national security issues is acceptable but it cannot be used to conceal a crime. [8-0]

• The Watergate Tapes• Impact-

– Resignation of Nixon– Executive Immunity checked– Pardon by Ford– Abuse of Power defined…

Gregg v. Georgia 1976Gregg v. Georgia 1976

• Court ruled that rewritten capital punishment were constitutional if and only if A) Juries/ Judges allowed to consider character and circumstances of crime and B) Death penalty cannot be made mandatory. [7-2]

• Impact-– States would reform their death penalty

statutes and capital punishment returns to States

Wallace v. Jaffree 1985Wallace v. Jaffree 1985

• Court ruled that moments of silence in public schools are in and of themselves constitutional but may not be a “favored practice.” Courts must look at legislative/ district intent. [6-3]

• Impact-– Helped to define public and private speech– Court cases are currently in the courts

Thompson v. Oklahoma Thompson v. Oklahoma 19881988

• Court ruled that applying the death penalty to a 15-year old was prohibited under the 8th Amendment. [5-3]

• William Thompson murdered his brother-in-law who had been abused his sister.

• Impact-– Juveniles under 16 would not be given capital

punishment– Courts applied later to mental deficiency but age-

based punishments are being tested

Texas v. Johnson 1989Texas v. Johnson 1989

• Texas law made desecration of U.S. or Texas flags crimes. Supreme Court ruled that this mode of “self-expressionism” was protected under the 1st Amendment. State cannot “force” patriotism. [5-4]

• Thompson burned the Flag in protest of Ronald Reagan’s policies at the RNC

• Impact-– Flag desecration amendment bills in State

legislatures and Congress

Planned Parenthood v. Planned Parenthood v. Casey 1992Casey 1992

• Pennsylvania state regulations regarding abortion were challenged. Upheld the constitutional right to have an abortion but lowered the standard for analyzing restrictions [5-4]

• Informed Consent, Parental Notification, 24-hour wait, not Husband Notification

• Impact– Roe was affirmed but with conditions– Undo Burden– Due Process

Reno v. ShawReno v. Shaw19931993

• Redistricting and racial gerrymandering. The court ruled that redistricting based on race must be held to a standard of strict scrutiny under the equal protection clause. [5-4]

• Legislatures must be conscious of race to the extent that they must ensure compliance with the Voting Rights Act.

• Impact– Courts and Judges typically decide redistricting

Bush v. Gore 2000Bush v. Gore 2000

• Supreme Court of Florida ordered the Circuit Court of Leon County to tabulate by hand 9,000 votes. It also ordered the inclusion of 215 and 168 votes in nearby counties. Issue is the recount in select areas and equal treatment. Ruled to reverse and remand [5-4]

• Punch cards, hanging chads, etc.• Impact-

– Florida recount stopped– George W. Bush becomes 43rd president– Election reform?– 14th Amendment

Citizens United v. FEC Citizens United v. FEC 20102010

• Overrulling two previous cases• First Amendment rights of corporations• Government may not ban political

spending by corporations in candidate elections [5-4]

• Impact-– Basic free speech– Donations are equal to speech– Hard money…

Salazar v. Buono 2010Salazar v. Buono 2010

• Former National Park Ranger (Frank Buono) thought 1934 cross erected for WWI Vets on Mojave National Park was a violation of First Amendment

• Kenneth Salazar, Dept of Interior• Doesn’t violate separation of church

and state [5-4]• Impact

– Public support for religious symbols?

Landmark CasesUnit IV