judicial branch

steps in decision making

1. written arguments 2. oral arguments 3. conference 4. opinion writing 5. announcement

district courts

94 across the country and US territories 89 throughout the states according to population distribution 1 each in: D.C. Puerto Rico Guam US Virgin Islands Mariana Islands Original jurisdiction over federal cases Territory District Courts also have original jurisdiction over local cases

original jurisdiction

A court in which a case is first heard

appellate jurisdiction

A court that hears cases on appeal from a lower court. Examples: They want a modified decision

written argument

Lawyers first prepare a written BRIEF that explains their side of the case The justices study the briefs

opinion writing

After the Court reaches a decision, one justice writes a MAJORITY OPINION. It presents the views of the majority justices. The opinion states the facts, announces the ruling, and explains the Court's reasoning in reaching the decision The Court may also write a unanimous opinion when all justices vote the same way. One or more justices who disagree with the majority may write DISSENTING OPINIONS. A justice who votes with the majority, but for different reasons, may write a CONCURRING OPINION.

conference

On Fridays, justices meet privately to discuss the case. A majority vote decides the case

what is a crime

Any act that breaks the law AND there is a punishment for Felonies= SERIOUS crimes Homicide kidnapping Misdemeanors= LESS serious crimes Traffic violations Disorderly conduct

federal judges/judges of SC

Appointed by president Advisors recommend candidates Professional background Political/social views Collegiate career Confirmed by Senate Judiciary commit. holds hearings Professional background Political/social views Simple majority vote

exclusive jurisdiction

Cases can only be heard in federal courts Examples: cases involving ambassadors, or official of foreign governments

concurrent jurisdiction

Cases may be tried in either state or federal courts Examples: Disputes involving citizens of different states (cases in diverse citizenship)

victimless crimes/ white collar crimes

Crime that doesn't violate another persons rights Gambling Drug use White Collar Crimes= committed while on the job Stealing office supplies Embezzlement= taking $$ in your care from the job Fraud= cheating someone out of $ or property

major players in the court system

Criminal law a. Prosecutor—represents the people b. Defendant—indv accused of breaking law Civil law a. Plaintiff—indv who was wronged b. Defendant—indv accused of wrongdoing Judge a. Applies the law b. Instructs the jury c. Keeps proceedings fair and neutral d. May decide case if no jury Jury a. Decides facts of case b. Determines innocence or guilt

state courts

Deal with state laws Three levels Trial courts Appellate courts (aka courts of appeal) State supreme court (aka court of final appeal) Cases may be appealed to the USSC if a federal or constitutional issue is involved

which court to use

Each court system deals with certain kinds of cases. Federal courts hear cases involving federal laws, the U.S. Constitution, or disputes between citizens of different states. State courts hear cases involving state laws or the state's constitution. They also deal with disagreements between citizens of the state. State courts normally resolve the kinds of issues you hear about in everyday life, such as family matters, accidents, crimes, and traffic violations

oral argument

Each side gets 30 minutes to present its case orally. Justices then ask tough questions

judiciary act of 1789

Established the federal court system by dividing the country into federal judicial districts, creating district courts and courts of appeals

roe v. wade

Facts of the case Roe, a Texas resident, sought to terminate her pregnancy by abortion. Texas law prohibited abortions except to save the pregnant woman's life. After granting certiorari, the Court heard arguments twice. The first time, Roe's attorney -- Sarah Weddington -- could not locate the constitutional hook of her argument for Justice Potter Stewart. Her opponent -- Jay Floyd -- misfired from the start. Weddington sharpened her constitutional argument in the second round. Her new opponent -- Robert Flowers -- came under strong questioning from Justices Potter Stewart and Thurgood Marshall. Question Does the Constitution embrace a woman's right to terminate her pregnancy by abortion? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology 7-2 DECISION FOR JANE ROE MAJORITY OPINION BY HARRY A. BLACKMUN The Court held that a woman's right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy (recognized in Griswold v. Connecticut) protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. The decision gave a woman total autonomy over the pregnancy during the first trimester and defined different levels of state interest for the second and third trimesters. As a result, the laws of 46 states were affected by the Court's ruling.

nixon v. united states

Facts of the case A grand jury returned indictments against seven of President Richard Nixon's closest aides in the Watergate affair. The special prosecutor appointed by Nixon and the defendants sought audio tapes of conversations recorded by Nixon in the Oval Office. Nixon asserted that he was immune from the subpoena claiming "executive privilege," which is the right to withhold information from other government branches to preserve confidential communications within the executive branch or to secure the national interest. Decided together with Nixon v. United States. Question Is the President's right to safeguard certain information, using his "executive privilege" confidentiality power, entirely immune from judicial review? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology << decision 1 of 2 >> UNANIMOUS DECISION MAJORITY OPINION BY WARREN E. BURGER No. The Court held that neither the doctrine of separation of powers, nor the generalized need for confidentiality of high-level communications, without more, can sustain an absolute, unqualified, presidential privilege. The Court granted that there was a limited executive privilege in areas of military or diplomatic affairs, but gave preference to "the fundamental demands of due process of law in the fair administration of justice." Therefore, the president must obey the subpoena and produce the tapes and documents. Nixon resigned shortly after the release of the tapes.

dred scott v. sandford

Facts of the case Dred Scott was a slave in Missouri. From 1833 to 1843, he resided in Illinois (a free state) and in an area of the Louisiana Territory, where slavery was forbidden by the Missouri Compromise of 1820. After returning to Missouri, Scott sued unsuccessfully in the Missouri courts for his freedom, claiming that his residence in free territory made him a free man. Scott then brought a new suit in federal court. Scott's master maintained that no pure-blooded Negro of African descent and the descendant of slaves could be a citizen in the sense of Article III of the Constitution. Question Was Dred Scott free or slave? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology 7-2 DECISION FOR SANFORD MAJORITY OPINION BY ROGER B. TANEY Held portions of the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional in violation of the Fifth Amendment, treating Scott as property, not as a person. Dred Scott was a slave. Under Articles III and IV, argued Taney, no one but a citizen of the United States could be a citizen of a state, and that only Congress could confer national citizenship. Taney reached the conclusion that no person descended from an American slave had ever been a citizen for Article III purposes. The Court then held the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional, hoping to end the slavery question once and for all.

in re gault

Facts of the case Gerald Francis Gault, fifteen years old, was taken into custody for allegedly making an obscene phone call. Gault had previously been placed on probation. The police did not leave notice with Gault's parents, who were at work, when the youth was arrested. After proceedings before a juvenile court judge, Gault was committed to the State Industrial School until he reached the age of 21. Question Were the procedures used to commit Gault constitutionally legitimate under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology 8-1 DECISION FOR GAULT MAJORITY OPINION BY ABE FORTAS No. The proceedings of the Juvenile Court failed to comply with the Constitution. The Court held that the proceedings for juveniles had to comply with the requirements of the Fourteenth Amendment. These requirements included adequate notice of charges, notification of both the parents and the child of the juvenile's right to counsel, opportunity for confrontation and cross-examination at the hearings, and adequate safeguards against self-incrimination. The Court found that the procedures used in Gault's case met none of these requirements.

texas v. johnson

Facts of the case In 1984, in front of the Dallas City Hall, Gregory Lee Johnson burned an American flag as a means of protest against Reagan administration policies. Johnson was tried and convicted under a Texas law outlawing flag desecration. He was sentenced to one year in jail and assessed a $2,000 fine. After the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction, the case went to the Supreme Court. Question Is the desecration of an American flag, by burning or otherwise, a form of speech that is protected under the First Amendment? 5-4 DECISION MAJORITY OPINION BY WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, JR. In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's burning of a flag was protected expression under the First Amendment. The Court found that Johnson's actions fell into the category of expressive conduct and had a distinctively political nature. The fact that an audience takes offense to certain ideas or expression, the Court found, does not justify prohibitions of speech. The Court also held that state officials did not have the authority to designate symbols to be used to communicate only limited sets of messages, noting that "[i]f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable."

tinker v. Des moines

Facts of the case In December 1965, a group of students in Des Moines held a meeting in the home of 16-year-old Christopher Eckhardt to plan a public showing of their support for a truce in the Vietnam war. They decided to wear black armbands throughout the holiday season and to fast on December 16 and New Year's Eve. The principals of the Des Moines school learned of the plan and met on December 14 to create a policy that stated that any student wearing an armband would be asked to remove it, with refusal to do so resulting in suspension. On December 16, Mary Beth Tinker and Christopher Eckhardt wore their armbands to school and were sent home. The following day, John Tinker did the same with the same result. The students did not return to school until after New Year's Day, the planned end of the protest. Through their parents, the students sued the school district for violating the students' right of expression and sought an injunction to prevent the school district from disciplining the students. The district court dismissed the case and held that the school district's actions were reasonable to uphold school discipline. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed the decision without opinion. Question Does a prohibition against the wearing of armbands in public school, as a form of symbolic protest, violate the students' freedom of speech protections guaranteed by the First Amendment? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology 7-2 DECISION FOR TINKER MAJORITY OPINION BY ABE FORTAS Yes. Justice Abe Fortas delivered the opinion of the 7-2 majority. The Supreme Court held that the armbands represented pure speech that is entirely separate from the actions or conduct of those participating in it. The Court also held that the students did not lose their First Amendment rights to freedom of speech when they stepped onto school property. In order to justify the suppression of speech, the school officials must be able to prove that the conduct in question would "materially and substantially interfere" with the operation of the school. In this case, the school district's actions evidently stemmed from a fear of possible disruption rather than any actual interference. In his concurring opinion, Justice Potter Stewart wrote that children are not necessarily guaranteed the full extent of First Amendment rights. Justice Byron R. White wrote a separate concurring opinion in which he noted that the majority's opinion relies on a distinction between communication through words and communication through action. Justice Hugo L. Black wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the First Amendment does not provide the right to express any opinion at any time. Because the appearance of the armbands distracted students from their work, they detracted from the ability of the school officials to perform their duties, so the school district was well within its rights to discipline the students. In his separate dissent, Justice John M. Harlan argued that school officials should be afforded wide authority to maintain order unless their actions can be proven to stem from a motivation other than a legitimate school interest.

Marbury v. Madison

Facts of the case The case began on March 2, 1801, when an obscure Federalist, William Marbury, was designated as a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia. Marbury and several others were appointed to government posts created by Congress in the last days of John Adams's presidency, but these last-minute appointments were never fully finalized. The disgruntled appointees invoked an act of Congress and sued for their jobs in the Supreme Court. (Justices William Cushing and Alfred Moore did not participate.) Question Is Marbury entitled to his appointment? Is his lawsuit the correct way to get it? And, is the Supreme Court the place for Marbury to get the relief he requests? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR MARBURY MAJORITY OPINION BY JOHN MARSHALL Though Marbury was entitled to it, the Court was unable to grant it because Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted with Article III Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution and was therefore null and void. Yes; yes; and it depends. The justices held, through Marshall's forceful argument, that on the last issue the Constitution was "the fundamental and paramount law of the nation" and that "an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void." In other words, when the Constitution--the nation's highest law--conflicts with an act of the legislature, that act is invalid. This case establishes the Supreme Court's power of judicial review.

plessy v. ferguson

Facts of the case The state of Louisiana enacted a law that required separate railway cars for blacks and whites. In 1892, Homer Adolph Plessy -- who was seven-eighths Caucasian -- took a seat in a "whites only" car of a Louisiana train. He refused to move to the car reserved for blacks and was arrested. Question Is Louisiana's law mandating racial segregation on its trains an unconstitutional infringement on both the privileges and immunities and the equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology 7-1 DECISION FOR FERGUSON MAJORITY OPINION BY HENRY B. BROWN Equal but separate accommodations for whites and blacks imposed by Louisiana do not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment No, the state law is within constitutional boundaries. The majority, in an opinion authored by Justice Henry Billings Brown, upheld state-imposed racial segregation. The justices based their decision on the separate-but-equal doctrine, that separate facilities for blacks and whites satisfied the Fourteenth Amendment so long as they were equal. (The phrase "separate but equal" was not part of the opinion.) Justice Brown conceded that the 14th Amendment intended to establish absolute equality for the races before the law. But Brown noted that "in the nature of things it could not have been intended to abolish distinctions based upon color, or to enforce social, as distinguished from political equality, or a commingling of the two races unsatisfactory to either." In short, segregation does not in itself constitute unlawful discrimination.

miranda v. arizona

Facts of the case This case represents the consolidation of four cases, in each of which the defendant confessed guilt after being subjected to a variety of interrogation techniques without being informed of his Fifth Amendment rights during an interrogation. On March 13, 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in his house and brought to the police station where he was questioned by police officers in connection with a kidnapping and rape. After two hours of interrogation, the police obtained a written confession from Miranda. The written confession was admitted into evidence at trial despite the objection of the defense attorney and the fact that the police officers admitted that they had not advised Miranda of his right to have an attorney present during the interrogation. The jury found Miranda guilty. On appeal, the Supreme Court of Arizona affirmed and held that Miranda's constitutional rights were not violated because he did not specifically request council. Question Do the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination extend to the police interrogation of a suspect? conclusion 5-4 DECISION FOR MIRANDA MAJORITY OPINION BY EARL WARREN The Fifth Amendment requires that law enforcement officials advise suspects of their right to remain silent and to obtain an attorney during interrogations while in police custody. Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the 5-4 majority. The Supreme Court held that the Fifth Amendment's protection against self-incrimination is available in all settings. Therefore, prosecution may not use statements arising from a custodial interrogation of a suspect unless certain procedural safeguards were in place. Such safeguards include proof that the suspect was aware of his right to be silent, that any statement he makes may be used against him, that he has the right to have an attorney present, that he has the right to have an attorney appointed to him, that he may waive these rights if he does so voluntarily, and that if at any points he requests an attorney there will be no further questioning until the attorney arrives. The Court held that, in each of the cases, the interrogation techniques used did not technically fall into the category of coercive, but they failed to ensure that the defendant's decision to speak with the police was entirely the product of his own free will. Justice Tom C. Clark wrote a dissenting opinion in which he argued that the majority's opinion created an unnecessarily strict interpretation of the Fifth Amendment that curtails the ability of the police to effectively execute their duties. He wrote that the state should have the burden to prove that the suspect was aware of his rights during the interrogation, but that statements resulting from interrogation should not be automatically excluded if the suspect was not explicitly informed of his rights. In his separate dissenting opinion, Justice John M. Harlan wrote that the judicial precedent and legislative history surrounding the Fifth Amendment does not support the view that the Fifth Amendment prohibits all pressure on the suspect. He also argued that there was no legal precedent to support the requirement to specifically inform suspects of their rights. Justices Potter Stewart and Byron R. White joined in the dissent. Justice White wrote a separate dissent in which he argued that the Fifth Amendment only protects defendants from giving self-incriminating testimony if explicitly compelled to do so. He argued that custodial interrogation was not inherently coercive and did not require such a broad interpretation of the protections of the Fifth Amendment. Such an interpretation harms the criminal process by destroying the credibility of confessions. Justices Harlan and Stewart joined in the dissenting opinion.

brown v. board of education

Facts of the case This case was the consolidation of four cases arising in separate states relating to the segregation of public schools on the basis of race. In each of the cases, African American minors had been denied admittance to certain public schools based on laws allowing public education to be segregated by race. They argued that such segregation violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The plaintiffs were denied relief based on the precedent set by Plessy v. Ferguson, which established the "separate but equal" doctrine that stated separate facilities for the races was constitutional as long as the facilities were "substantially equal." In the case arising from Delaware, the Supreme Court of Delaware ruled that the African American students had to be admitted to the white public schools because of their higher quality facilities. Question Does the segregation of public education based solely on race violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? Conclusion Sort: by seniority by ideology UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR BROWN ET AL. MAJORITY OPINION BY EARL WARREN Separate but equal educational facilities for racial minorities is inherently unequal violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment Yes. Chief Justice Earl Warren delivered the opinion of the unanimous Court. The Supreme Court held that "separate but equal" facilities are inherently unequal and violate the protections of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Court also held that the segregation of public education based on race instilled a sense of inferiority that had a hugely detrimental effect on the education and personal growth of African American children.

announcement

Finally the Court announces its decision. Printed copies of the opinion go to news reporters. A copy is posted on the Court's web site

two court systems

Here's the confusing part: There are two systems of courts in the United States. The federal court system deals with disputes about laws that apply to the entire United States. State court systems mostly deal with disputes about state laws. Each statehas its own court system created by its own state constitution. Whether people take their case to a federal or state court depends on the laws involved in the case. The good news is that state court systems usually work just like the federal court system.

judicial restraint

Judges should always try to decide on cases on the basis of: 1. The original intent of those who wrote the constititution. 2. Precedent - past decisions in earlier cases Examples -Elected legislators, not appointed judges should make laws -Regardless of what is going on in society, the judges refrain from making decisions that would drastically change society. -They "restrain" themselves from setting new policies with their decisions. -They make decisions strictly based on what the Constitution says.

What must the court do to hear a case?

Justices must do the following: "Rule of Four"—four of the nine justices must agree to hear the indv case out of the 1000s of cases appealed to them. WRIT OF CERTIORARI- calling up a case for review

federal judges

Life terms, unless: Death Resignation/retirement Impeachment Balance rights of individual vs. common good Why it matters!! Conservative presidents = conservative justices Liberal presidents = liberal justices Justices serve for years Justices interpret the Constitution; set precedent Those precedents affect all Americans

appellate courts

Losing in the trial court doesn't mean the case is over. If the losing side thinks there's been an error, they can ask a higher court to review the verdict and replace it with a different decision. The courts above the trial court are called appellate courts. The federal system and most state systems have two appellate-level courts: a Court of Appeals and a Supreme Court. (Your state might have a different name for these courts!) Asking an appellate court to review a case is called making an appeal. 12 regional "circuit" courts, intermediate level

criminal v. civil

Most trials you see on TV involve a person who has been accused of a crime. But criminal cases are not the only kind of cases that go to trial. Sometimes people have a disagreement that they can't resolve on their own. Often, one side feels that the other side violated their rights in some way. This kind of case is called a civil case. The goal of a civil case is not to find out whether someone is innocent or guilty, but to decide which side's version of the story is correct.

federal courts

Original jurisdiction over federal issues Federal laws Constitutional issues Resident of one state v resident of another state Treaties Maritime issues Foreign govt is involved US govt is involved Three levels Trial court (aka District Court) Appellate court (aka Court of Appeals) Supreme Court (aka Court of Final Appeal

causes of crime

Poverty Poor people live in overcrowded, rundown areas Poorly educated Unstable families No job training Break laws to obtain things they don't have Illegal Drug Use Illegal drug users often turn to other types of crime to support drug habits Permissive Society Parents spoil children, do whatever they want Children don't control behavior when older People have not learned to act responsibly Urbanization More crimes committed in cities v. rural areas More urban= more crime Cities provide more opportunities for criminals

judicial review

Power to overturn any Act of Congress or executive action the Court deems unconstitutional Is it in the Constitution? Not specifically stated; however, the Constitution says the Court shall "interpret the law" Established by case of Marbury v. Madison

purpose of court

Resolve legal disputes by applying the law to indv situations Criminal law: the people vs an indv Civil law: an indv vs an indv ***Please note that a legal indv does NOT have to be a human being. A legal indv can be an indv, a business, a corp, a govt agency.***

crimes against property

Stealing or destroying someone's property Burglary= force/ illegal entry into someone's home w/ the intention to steal Robbery= crime against both person AND property Larceny= theft of property w/o force from a person Shoplifting Petty Larceny= less than 'x' amount of $$$$ Grand Larceny= greater than 'x' amount of $$$$ Vandalism= willful destruction of property tagging Arson= destroying property by using fire What Left Eye did

how cases reach the court

The Supreme Court conducts business each year from Oct- June or July. Each month, justices spend 2weeks listening to oral arguments on cases and 2 weeks writing opinions and studying new cases Court receives most cases on appeal from lower courts 7,000 applications each year, court hears fewer than 200 Accepted cases go on the Court docket, or calendar

supreme court justices

The main job of the nation's top court is to decide whether laws are allowable under the Constitution. 8 associate justices and 1 chief justice make up the Supreme Court. President appoints justices, with Senate approval.

trials

The trial court is the first court to hear a case. Both the state and federal systems have trial courts. In the Federal system, the trial court is called a District Court. In the trial court, lawyers use evidence to try to prove that their client's side of the story is what really happened. Evidence can be almost anything—witnesses, videos, photographs, a letter, a piece of fabric, or even a murder weapon! In a jury trial, a group of twelve people listens to the evidence and decides who wins the case. That decision is called the verdict. In a bench trial there is no jury, so the judge gives the verdict.

crimes against persons

Violent crimes that.... Harm someone End someone's life Threaten to do any of the above Most serious= homicide Most common= aggravated assault

judicial activism

•Judges should act more boldly when making decisions on cases Law should be interpreted and applied based on ongoing changes in conditions and values. As society changes and their beliefs and values change, courts should then make decisions in cases the reflect those changes. examples Cases involving Civil Rights Those cases would have been decided much differently had the majority of nation not started wanting to eliminate discrimination Social Welfare Issues Think of Roe v. Wade cases that made abortions legal. This was a change in society where people started to find abortions more socially acceptable.