Chapter 13: The Courts

Are judges politicians? and how has the supreme court changed

-The Judiciary Act of 1789- The number of Justices on the Supreme Court changed six times before settling at the present total of nine in 1869. Since the formation of the Court in 1790, there have been only 17 Chief Justices* and 102 Associate Justices, with Justices serving for an average of 16 years. -The Judiciary Act of 1789 created two types of trial courts—district courts and circuit courts. -The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the position of attorney general, who is the lead attorney for the United States. - Judicial review Supreme Court justices insist that politics plays no role in their decision-making. "We don't work as Democrats or Republicans," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. We simply are to interpret the law without the interference of our own beliefs. We do not represent the people's beliefs either like the H.O.R, we just interpret the constitution.

The Federal Court system is separated into five main areas:

1) *District court*: Lowest level of fed. courts, where fed. cases begin &trials are held (bank robbery, environmental violations, tax evasion) 2) *Supreme Court*: the highest federal court in the United States 3) *Court of appeals*: A court with appellate jurisdiction that hears appeals from the decisions of lower courts (district). 4) Bankruptcy courts 5) Special Jurisdiction

Supreme Court Decision making process:

1) briefs (write up of case) selected by Clerk (Reviews the cases, Prepare the justices for oral argument, Research and draft judicial opinions, Help with emergencies) 2) Plenary session (Oral argument<----Rule of 4) Four justices must agree on case for the case to be heard and decide if it falls under Court jurisdiction 3) Conference (deliberation) all justices must be present upon picking case. 9 unanimous votes 4) Majority (5 justices)/ Concurring/ Dissenting Opinion Majority: the winning side- explains the steps taken to come up with decision. Dissenting: losing side- explanation of why they were against the majority. Concurring: An opinion that agrees with the majority in a Supreme Court ruling but differs on the reasoning. 5) interacting with the other 2 branches

living constitution theory

A method of interpreting the Constitution that emphasizes the principles it embodies and their application to changing circumstances and needs. the Constitution is a living breathing document that can be changed and altered continuosly

plain-meaning-of-the-text theory

A theory that determines the constitutionality of a law in light of what the words of the Constitution obviously seem to say.

Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Restraint

Activism - A vigorous or active approach to reviewing the other branches of government. Restraint - Reluctance to interfere with elected branches, only doing so as a last resort

Judicial Review

Allows the court to determine the constitutionality of laws

John Marshall

American jurist and politician who served as the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court (1801-1835) and helped establish the practice of judicial review.

the first congress

An assembly of delegates from the thirteen colonies (soon to become the thirteen states). It governed during the Revolutionary War and under the Articles of Confederation. The Continental Congress first met in 1774, before the revolution. LAYED OUT THE STRUCTURE OF FEDERAL COURTS

Article III: Judicial Branch

Constitution: Provides for a Supreme Court and other federal courts Congress can establish. Justices and judges have lifetime terms and are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Does not explicitly provide for judicial review—the power of the courts to declare actions of the legislative and executive branches invalid or unconstitutional. Up to Bureaucrats to fill in gaps

Framers of the Constitution

Group of delegates who drafted the United States Constitution at the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 Hamilton: concerned with judicial branch lacking enforcement John Jay: felt same as Hamilton and quit his job as Cheif justice due to the branches lack of enforcement compared to the other two branches

Judiciary Act of 1789

In 1789 Congress passed this Act which created the federal-court system. The act managed to quiet popular apprehensions by establishing in each state a federal district court that operated according to local procedures. 6 supreme court justices

Theory of Original Intent

Interprets law by considering the intentions of the authors of the Constitution

election of 1800

Jefferson elected; defeats Adams, first peaceful, orderly transfer of power via competitive elections Called "Revolution of 1800"

federal statue

Law that applies to entire nation, passed by congress

Judicial Supremacy

The courts have the supreme authority to determine the constitutionality of the actions of others including the President and Congress. This principle, known as JUDICIAL REVIEW, is derived from the Supreme Court interpretation of the constitution in the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803. This principle is the most important check on the powers of the other branches of government. The concern that the Supreme Court will become more powerful than the executive or legislative branches passive power like smoke detector goes off when a serious issue arrives

appellate jurisdiction

The jurisdiction of courts that hear cases brought to them on appeal from lower courts. These courts do not review the factual record, only the legal issues involved.

Associate Justices

These are the other 8 justices on the Supreme Court other than the Chief Justice.

Rule of Four

a Supreme Court custom in which a case will be heard when four justices decide to do so

appellate court

a court that reviews cases already decided by a lower or trial court and that may change the lower court's decision Court of appeals

judicial restraint

a judicial philosophy in which a justice is more likely to let stand the decisions or actions of the other branches of government judges respect majority vote and see their role with constriction. They try not to make policy from the bench. -conservative judges with restrain philosophy - See their role as strict constructionists -narrowly interpret and apply law -uphold judicial precedent (stare decisis) - defer to legislation and not set policy MINDSET OF JUDICIAL RESTRAINT: -there are referees in a game of baseball. They regulate rules but do NOT participate in the "game" of creating new laws/implementing new policies

judicial activism (pluralism model)

a judicial philosophy in which a justice is more likely to overturn decisions or rule actions by the other branches unconstitutional, especially in an attempt to broaden individual rights and liberties judges actively promote issues THEY see as important - Liberal judges with activism philosophy - More willing to overturned judicial precedents in after 1960s - Legislate (make policy) from bench - Easier for consumers to win civil cases against buisnesses

judicial act of 1801

a law that increased the number of federal judges, allowing President John Adams to fill most of the new spots with Federalists

criminal law

a law that prohibits actions that could harm or endanger others, and establishes punishment for those actions

Stare Decisis (precedent)

a legal norm established in court cases that is then applied to future cases dealing with the same legal questions "Let the decision stand"...courts generally follow the decisions of lower courts in similar cases that set a precedent

judiciary act of 1869

a legislative act of Congress that set the number of justices of the Supreme Court at nine, which remains true today set number of justices at 9, relieved circuit riding burden, created new circuit judgeships

associate justice

a member of the Supreme Court who is not the chief justice

civil law

a non-criminal law defining private rights and remedies

Brief

a written legal argument presented to a court by one of the parties in a case one submitted by the petitioner, one submitted by the respondent, and OPTIONAL: some submitted by those interested in the case (amicus curiae)

A case will be placed on the Court's docket when ________ justices agree to do so. a. four b. five c. six d. all

a. four

A state case is more likely to be heard by the federal courts when ________. a. it involves a federal question b. a governor requests a federal court hearing c. it involves a criminal matter d. the state courts are unable to come up with a decision

a. it involves a federal question

majority opinion

an opinion of the Court with which more than half the nine justices agree

concurring opinion

an opinion written by a justice who agrees with the Court's majority opinion but has different reasons for doing so

dissenting opinion

an opinion written by a justice who disagrees with the majority opinion of the Court

writ of certiorari

an order of the Supreme Court calling up the records of the lower court so a case may be reviewed; sometimes abbreviated cert. formal request that the court hear your case

senatorial courtesy

an unwritten custom by which the president consults the senators in the state before nominating a candidate for a federal vacancy there, particularly for court positions

Besides the Supreme Court, there are lower courts in the national system called ________. a. state and federal courts b. district and circuit courts c. state and local courts d. civil and common courts

b. district and circuit courts

The Supreme Court's power of judicial review ________. a. is given to it in the original constitution b. enables it to declare acts of the other branches unconstitutional c. allows it to hear cases d. establishes the three-tiered court system

b. enables it to declare acts of the other branches unconstitutional

When using judicial restraint, a judge will usually ________. a. refuse to rule on a case b. overrule any act of Congress he or she doesn't like c. defer to the decisions of the elected branches of government d. make mostly liberal rulings

c. defer to the decisions of the elected branches of government

One of the main ways interest groups participate in Supreme Court cases is by ________. a. giving monetary contributions to the justices b. lobbying the justices c. filing amicus curiae briefs d. protesting in front of the Supreme Court building

c. filing amicus curiae briefs

Conference

closed meeting of the justices to discuss cases on the docket and take an initial vote

writ of mandamus

court order directing a party to perform a certain action translates to "We command"

Article III of the Constitution

creates the Supreme Court but allows Congress to establish lower courts. Judicial Branch

Which of the following is a check that the legislative branch has over the courts? a. Senate approval is needed for the appointment of justices and federal judges. b. Congress may rewrite a law the courts have declared unconstitutional. c. Congress may withhold funding needed to implement court decisions. d. all of the above

d. all of the above

When a Supreme Court ruling is made, justices may write a ________ to show they agree with the majority but for different reasons. a. brief b. dissenting opinion c. majority opinion d. concurring opinion

d. concurring opinion

The justices of the Supreme Court are ________. a. elected by citizens b. chosen by the Congress c. confirmed by the president d. nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate

d. nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate

watch these videos for a better understanding of the court system in the U.S

https://youtu.be/7sualy8OiKk https://youtu.be/QjLcLguoKC4 https://youtu.be/IGyx5UEwgtA

Chief Justice

justice on the Supreme Court who presides over the Court's public sessions

amicus curiae

literally a "friend of the court" and used for a brief filed by someone who is interested in but not party to a case

qualifications for justices

none are listed in the Constitution

State Statute

statutes (laws) enacted by state legislatures

Marbury v. Madison

the 1803 Supreme Court case that established the courts' power of judicial review and the first time the Supreme Court ruled an act of Congress to be unconstitutional Background/Causes: Election of 1800. democratic-republican Jefferson (antifederalist) defeated Federalist John Adams. Days before Jefferson was about to take office Adams, appoints new loyal federalist judges which infuriated Jefferson WHO: Marbury was appointed to be justice of the peace by Adams but wasn't able to accept his position due to Jeffersons Administration refusing to deliver the papers. It was up to Madison, Jeffersons Sec of State to do it. Marbury sues executive branch directly QUESTION: Was this case out of the courts Jurisdiction? Should marbury get his commision? CONCLUSION: Marbury lost because the court didn't have jurisdiction. The law that said the court had jurisdiction was unconstitutional. Hence *Judicial Review.* The Court found that Madison's refusal to deliver the commission was illegal, but did not order Madison to hand over Marbury's commission via writ of mandamus. Instead, the Court held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 enabling Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court's original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III, Section 2, established. IMPORTANCE: This case establishes the right of the court system to review acts passed by other branches in accordance to the constitution. Judicial branch was seen as an equal in accordance to the other branches Marbury when directly to Supreme court instead of going through district court when is out of Courts jurisdiction

circuit courts

the appeals (appellate) courts of the federal court system that review decisions of the lower (district) courts; also called courts of appeals

courts of appeals

the appellate courts of the federal court system that review decisions of the lower (district) courts; also called circuit courts

Federal Courts

the courts of the national government that deal with problems between states, with the constitution, and with laws made by congress Courts that hear disputes about laws that apply to the entire United States

dual court system

the division of the courts into two separate systems, one federal and one state, with each of the fifty states having its own courts

chief justice

the highest-ranking justice on the Supreme Court

solicitor general

the lawyer who represents the federal government and argues some cases before the Supreme Court screen out a lot of petitions (writ of cert.) because those cases don't raise a lot of federal law questions or because they have already been decided in other cases

trial court

the level of court in which a case starts or is first tried

Docket

the list of cases pending on a court's calendar

common law

the pattern of law developed by judges through case decisions largely based on precedent

original jurisdiction

the power of a court to hear a case for the first time ex) if a murder is committed in Big Bend National park, it is in the FEDERAL courts jurisdiction to hear the case since it happened on a national park

judicial review

the power of the courts to review actions taken by the other branches of government and the states and to rule on whether those actions are constitutional

stare decisis

the principle by which courts rely on past decisions and their precedents when making decisions in new cases

Precedent

the principles or guidelines established by courts in earlier cases that frame the ongoing operation of the courts, steering the direction of the entire system

district courts

the trial courts of the federal court system where cases are tried, evidence is presented, and witness testimony is heard

Job of Justices and three different judicial interpretations

to interpret the law and apply it making sure no one is denied life liberty and property (obergefell v Hodges) 3 types of mindsets when it comes to interpreting the constitution: a) Theory of original intent: b) Plain-meaning-of-text theory: c) Living constitution theory also, there's statutory interpretation: Federal vs State statue (Obergefell v Hodges)

oral argument

words spoken before the Supreme Court (usually by lawyers) explaining the legal reasons behind their position in a case and why it should prevail