Chapter 15: The Federal Courts
Among the following examples which is the best example of stare decisis? - An attorney uses a previous state court ruling to argue his client's case. - An attorney argues that an employer broke a contract by firing the client without severance pay. - An attorney argues that an unlawful environmental regulation forced her client from her property. - The government is being sued for unlawful discrimination by someone who claims to have been targeted because of his or her race.
- An attorney uses a previous state court ruling to argue his client's case. (The attorney is invoking stare decisis by using a precedent established by another court, insisting that the previous decision must stand for the new case because of similar circumstances.)
How did the Supreme Court gain the power of judicial review? - Judicial review was established in the decision of Marbury v. Madison. - Judicial review was established by George Washington in Executive Proclamation 93. - Judicial review was established by Congress in the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789. - Judicial review was established in Article III of the Constitution.
- Judicial review was established in the decision of Marbury v. Madison. (Judicial review was established by Justice John Marshall as a way of asserting judicial power while avoiding a confrontation with Thomas Jefferson.)
The number of amicus curiae briefs has (1) over time. When compared to regular cases, landmark cases have (2) briefs submitted. increased decreased about the same number of fewer stayed about the same more
1. Increased 2. More
Place the following actions in the correct sequence of occurrence, from first to last, in the process by which the Supreme Court accepts and reviews a case. Note that this list represents only a few of the overall sequence of steps in this process. - The Court grants a writ of certiorari. - A petition for a writ of certiorari is filed. - Law clerks evaluate the petition. - Oral arguments commence.
1. Petition for a writ of certiorari is filed (This is the first step for nearly all cases the Supreme Court might review.) 2. Law clerks evaluate the petition. ( The "cert pool" makes it easier for justices to get a handle on the thousands of potential cases they could hear.) 3. The court grants a writ of certiorari ( Once granted, a case with certiorari will appear before the Court.) 4. Oral arguments commence ( Once a case is argued before the Supreme Court, the justices vote on their decision and issue an opinion.)
Properly order the steps in which a case goes through the federal court system. U.S. Supreme Court U.S. district courts U.S. courts of appeals
1. U.S. district courts 2. U.S. courts of appeals 3. U.S. Supreme Court
How many Supreme Court justices must agree to hear a case in order for it to receive a writ of certiorari?
4 (This is slightly less than a majority. It is also known as the "The Rule of Four," not to be confused with the excellent Sherlock Holmes novel The Sign of Four.)
Match each Supreme Court document to its definition. brief amicus curiae brief opinion dissenting opinion - document laying out the legal belief of the Supreme Court justices about the case in question - document laying out the legal belief of a minority of the Supreme Court justices about the case in question - interest-group-written brief that advises the Court on how to rule on a case - attorney-written document arguing why the Court should agree with their client
Brief: - attorney-written document arguing why the Court should agree with their client (Briefs are submitted by each side and read carefully by the justices.) Amicus curiae brief: - interest-group-written brief that advises the Court on how to rule on a case (These kinds of briefs can help sway judicial opinion.) opinion: -Document laying out the legal belief of the Supreme Court justices about the case in question (There is at least one majority opinion and sometimes one or more concurring opinions.) Dissenting opinion: - document laying out the legal belief of a minority of the Supreme Court justices about the case in question (There can be anywhere from zero to four dissenting opinions.)
Match the following terms to their definitions. civil law plaintiff defendant criminal law - Only the government can bring charges against an individual. - This mainly involves torts and contract disputes between individuals, groups, and corporations. - The party accused of breaking the law. - The party who brings the case before the court.
Civil Law: only the government can bring charges against an individual Plaintiff: the party who brings the case before the court Defendant: the party accused of breaking the law. Criminal Law: this mainly involves torts and contract disputes between individuals, groups, and corporations.
Choose all of the following that are limitations on the power of the federal courts. - Courts lack appellate jurisdiction. - Courts can only offer limited forms of relief. - Courts lack enforcement powers. - Judges must wait for cases to come to them.
Correct Answers: - Courts lack enforcement powers. - Judges must wait for cases to come to them. - Courts can only offer limited forms of relief. Incorrect Answers: - Courts lack appellate jurisdiction.
Why does the Supreme Court rarely challenge the actions of executive agencies? - Doing so may provoke a fight with the president. - The Supreme Court lacks the authority to do so. - Executive agencies follow a formal rule-making process. - There are few examples of individuals legally challenging executive agencies' actions.
Correct Answers: - Doing so may provoke a fight with the president. - Executive agencies follow a formal rules-making process. Incorrect Answers: - There are few examples of individuals legally challenging executive agencies' actions. - The Supreme Court lacks the authority to do so.
Which of the following are ways Congress can check the power of the federal courts? - It can reduce the number of judges and courts - It can reduce the jurisdiction of the courts through statutes. - It can dissolve the Supreme Court. - It can veto Supreme Court decisions it disagrees with.
Correct Answers: - It can reduce the jurisdiction of the courts through statutes. - it can reduce the number of judges and courts Incorrect Answers: - It can dissolve the Supreme Court. - It can veto Supreme Court decisions it disagrees with.
Which two scenarios are most likely to be granted a writ of certiorari by the Supreme Court? - A federal trial court and a circuit court both rule against a defendant; the decision is appealed by the defendant. - A state supreme court rules against a citizen in a matter of racial discrimination with no clear precedent; the decision is appealed by the citizen. - One federal appeals court rules one way on a case, while another federal appeals court rules the other way; the losers in both cases appeal to the Supreme Court. - A state court refuses to review the appeal of a losing party in state district court; the loser appeals to Supreme Court.
Correct Answers: - One federal appeals court rules one way on a case, while another federal appeals court rules the other way; the losers in both cases appeal to the Supreme Court. - A state supreme court rules against a citizen in a matter of racial discrimination with no clear precedent; the decision is appealed by the citizen. Incorrect Answers: - A federal trial court and a circuit court both rule against a defendant; the decision is appealed by the defendant. - A state court refuses to review the appeal of a losing party in state district court; the loser appeals to Supreme Court.
Why does the president rarely get challenged by the Court? - The Court needs the president's support to enforce its decisions. - The president nominates justices who agree with his approach to executive authority - The president has control over the way "standing" in a case is determined. - The president can shrink the Court if it challenges him.
Correct Answers: - The president nominates justice who agree with his approach to executive authority. - the court needs the president's support to enforce its decisions Incorrect Answers: - The president has control over the way "standing" in a case is determined. - The president can shrink the Court if it challenges him.
Which of the following cases can be heard only in a federal court? - a case involving interpretation of the U.S. Constitution - a case involving citizens from multiple states - a case appealed out of a state trial court - a case involving a federal law
Correct Answers: - a case involving a federal law - a case involving interpretation of the us constitution Incorrect Answers: - a case appealed out of a state trial court - a case involving citizens from multiple states
When does the Supreme Court have original jurisdiction over a case? - in cases in which a foreign ambassador is involved - in a case in which a member of Congress is involved - when a state government brings a case against citizens of another state - in a case between the federal government and a state government - in cases brought by the federal government against a citizen
Correct Answers: - in a case between the federal government and a state government - in cases in which a foreign ambassador is involved - when a state government brings a case against citizens of another state Incorrect Answers: - in cases brought by the federal government against a citizen - in a case in which a member of Congress is involved
What factors influence the Supreme Court's decision-making practices? - deference to lower court rulings - concern over protecting the Court's reputation - political ideology - law and precedent on relevant cases
Correct Answers: - law and precedent on relevant cases - concern over protecting the court's reputation - political ideology Incorrect Answers: - deference to lower court rulings
Which of the following criteria are used by the Supreme Court to determine whether it will hear a case? - Parties to the issue have an interest in the outcome. - The case is relevant/timely; the issue is not moot. - Parties have standing, or a stake, in the outcome. - The issue represents a controversy.
Correct Answers: - the case is relevant/timely; the issue is not moot. - parties have standing, or a stake, in the outcome. - the issue represents a controversy. Incorrect Answers: - Parties to the issue have an interest in the outcome.
Which of the following characteristics are relevant for determining which federal court has jurisdiction over a case? - location where the case was filed - the parties in the case - subject matter of the case - the size of the court's docket
Correct Answers: - the parties in the case - location where the case was filed - subject matter of the case Incorrect Answers: - The size of the court's docket
Which statements about the Supreme Court's opinions on a case are correct? - The majority opinion sets major precedent for future cases. - The dissenting opinion can signal division in the Court. - The chief justice always writes the majority opinion. - There is only one opinion written on behalf of the winning side.
Correct Answers: -The majority opinion sets major precedent for future cases. -The dissenting opinion can signal division in the Court. Incorrect Answers: - The chief justice always writes the majority opinion. - There is only one opinion written on behalf of the winning side.
T/F: Senator Bedfellow is concerned that a bill Congress is considering might be unconstitutional. He can ask the Supreme Court for its opinion to save Congress the time of passing an unconstitutional law.
False (The Court has interpreted the Constitution's "cases and controversies" clause to mean that it cannot render advisory opinions on potential laws.)
Which of the following hypothetical Supreme Court decisions are examples of judicial restraint, and which are examples of judicial activism? judicial activism judicial restraint - A conservative Court allows a state to exempt itself from EPA guidelines despite the supremacy clause. - A liberal Court rules against someone claiming federal law discriminated against him, deeming the law is constitutional. - A liberal Court uses implied language from previous Court decisions, despite the absence of explicit language in current statutes. - A conservative Court upholds campaign spending limits passed by Congress and bases the ruling on constitutional language.
Judicial activism: - a liberal court rules against someone claiming federal law discriminated against him, deeming the law is constitutional. - A conservative Court allows a state to exempt itself from EPA guidelines despite the supremacy clause. Judicial restraint: - a conservative court upholds campaign spending limits passed by congress and bases the ruling on constitutional language. - A liberal Court rules against someone claiming federal law discriminated against him, deeming the law is constitutional.
Rank each court based on the number of cases it hears, from the court that hears the most cases to the court that hears the fewest. state courts of appeals U.S. Supreme Court state supreme courts federal courts of appeals federal district courts state trial courts
state trial courts, federal district courts, state courts of appeals, state supreme courts, federal courts of appeals, U.S. Supreme Court
