Chapter13Judiciary2020.pptxChapter 13: The Judiciary
American National Government
PL-102
Instructor Walter Pearn
1
Describe the evolving role of the courts since the ratification of the Constitution.
Explain why courts are uniquely situated to protect individual rights.
Recognize how the courts make public policy.
Describe the dual court system and its three tiers.
Explain how you are protected and governed by different U.S. court systems.
Compare the positive and negative aspects of a dual court system.
Chapter Objectives
2
Describe the differences between the U.S. district courts, circuit courts, and the Supreme Court.
Explain the significance of precedent in the courts’ operations.
Describe how judges are selected for their positions.
Analyze the structure and important features of the Supreme Court.
Explain how the Supreme Court selects cases to hear.
Discuss the Supreme Court’s processes and procedures.
Chapter Objectives
3
Describe how the Supreme Court decides cases and issues opinions.
Identify the various influences on the Supreme Court.
Explain how the judiciary is checked by the other branches of government.
Chapter Objectives
4
Under the Articles of Confederation, there was no national judiciary.
Article III of The U.S. Constitution changed that.
Article III calls for the creation of “one Supreme Court” and establishes the Court’s jurisdiction, or its authority to hear cases and make decisions about them, and the types of cases the Court may hear.
Original jurisdiction, a case is heard for the first time.
Appellate jurisdiction, a court hears a case on appeal from a lower court and may change the lower court’s decision.
Creation of the Judiciary
5
The Constitution also limits the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction to those rare cases of disputes between states, or between the United States and foreign ambassadors or ministers.
So, for the most part, the Supreme Court is an appeals court, operating under appellate jurisdiction and hearing appeals from the lower courts.
The rest of the development of the judicial system and the creation of the lower courts were left in the hands of Congress.
Creation of the Judiciary
6
Starting in New York in 1790, the early Supreme Court focused on establishing its rules and procedures and perhaps trying to carve its place as the new government’s third branch.
Even when the federal government moved to the nation’s capital in 1800, the Court had to share space with Congress in the Capitol building.
It was not until the Court’s 146th year of operation that Congress, at the urging of Chief Justice—and former president—William Howard Taft, provided the designation and funding for the Supreme Court’s own building, “on a scale in keeping with the importance and dignity of the Court and the Judiciary as a coequal, independent branch of the federal government.”
Beginning
7
The main functions of the judiciary and the Supreme Court in particular are the:
Interpretation of statutes
Constitutional provisions and the exercise of judicial review.
Functions of the Judicary
8
In 1803, the Supreme Court declared for itself the power of judicial review.
A power to which Hamilton had referred but that is not expressly mentioned in the Constitution.
Judicial review is the power of the courts, as part of the system of checks and balances, to look at actions taken by the other branches of government and the states and determine whether they are constitutional.
If the courts find an action to be unconstitutional, it becomes null and void.
Judicial Review
9
Judicial review was established in the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison, when, for the first time, the Court declared an act of Congress to be unconstitutional.
Wielding this power is a role Marshall defined as the “very essence of judicial duty,” and it continues today as one of the most significant aspects of judicial power.
Judicial review lies at the core of the court’s ability to check the other branches of government—and the states.
Marbury v. Madison
10
The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of all these issues and others.
Even without unanimous agreement among citizens, Supreme Court decisions have made all these possibilities a reality, a particularly important one for the individuals who become the beneficiaries.
The judicial branch has often made decisions the other branches were either unwilling or unable to make, and Hamilton was right in Federalist No. 78 when he said that without the courts exercising their duty to defend the Constitution, “all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing.”
Supreme Court
11
| Examples of Supreme Court Cases Involving Individuals | ||
| Case Name | Year | Court’s Decision |
| Brown v. Board of Education | 1954 | Public schools must be desegregated. |
| Gideon v. Wainwright | 1963 | Poor criminal defendants must be provided an attorney. |
| Miranda v. Arizona | 1966 | Criminal suspects must be read their rights. |
| Roe v. Wade | 1973 | Women have a constitutional right to abortion. |
| McDonald v. Chicago | 2010 | An individual has the right to a handgun in his or her home. |
| Riley v. California | 2014 | Police may not search a cell phone without a warrant. |
| Obergefell v. Hodges | 2015 | Same-sex couples have the right to marry in all states. |
12
In order to understand the role of courts in our political system, we need to understand the nature of the law.
The law can be defined as the principles and regulations applicable to all people and enforced by the government.
There are five basic types of law: common law, equity law, statutory law, constitutional law, and administrative law.
The Law
13
The principle of precedent is sometimes called stare decisis.
Stare decisis is a legal doctrine that urges courts to apply existing precedents to cases involving similar facts, thus making the law stable and predictable.
Changes are the exception rather than the rule.
However, stare decisis does not guarantee that courts will not overturn their prior decisions, and sometimes they do so.
The Law
14
Common law is a set of rules that have been created by judges over time in the course of rendering decisions on court cases.
These laws are based on good sense and custom and, to a large extent, the principle of precedent.
Common Law
15
Equity law is designed to prevent a harmful act and to grant remedies other than monetary awards.
Under equity, a party could obtain a court order, or injunction, requiring another party to refrain from some act.
Equity Law
16
Statutory law is a law that has been created and formally declared by a legislature. Statutory law is a law that has been created and formally declared by a legislature.
Constitutional law is the result of the interpretation or application of a national or state constitution.
Statutory/Constitutional Law
17
Administrative law consists of all the regulations that have been created by administrative or bureaucratic agencies.
For example, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service has issued countless regulations based on its interpretation of the tax laws enacted by Congress.
Administrative law
18
Today, most law can be divided into two broad categories: criminal and civil.
Criminal law, which is almost entirely statutory, deals with acts that endanger the public welfare.
Since the government acts to enforce criminal law, the government is the plaintiff—the party that brings the case to court—in all criminal trials.
Example: a criminal complaint in New Jersey would read:
State of New Jersey (Plaintiff)
v
John Doe (Defendant)
The party accused of the crime is the defendant.
Criminal and Civil Law
19
Crimes are usually classified as either misdemeanors or felonies. (New Jersey Crimes 1 – 4th degree and Offenses Disorderly Persons and Petty Disorderly Persons)
Misdemeanors (NJ Offenses) are less serious acts for which punishment many consist of a jail term of up to one year.
Felonies (NJ Crimes) are more serious acts for which punishment carries more than a year behind bars, for example life in prison or the death penalty for states that execute individuals convicted of murder.
Criminal and Civil Law
20
Civil law deals mainly with disputes between private individuals or corporations and defines the rights of the parties in the dispute.
Divorce suits or child custody matters are examples of civil cases.
A civil case may also arise when a person or a group sues the government, such as when a person claims to have been wrongfully injured by a government law enforcement agent.
Criminal and Civil Law
21
Dual court system, with courts at both the national and state levels. Both levels have three basic tiers consisting of trial courts, appellate courts, and finally courts of last resort, typically called supreme courts, at the top
Judiciary Today
22
| Jurisdiction of the Courts: State vs. Federal | |
| State Courts | Federal Courts |
| Hear most day-to-day cases, covering 90 percent of all cases | Hear cases that involve a “federal question,” involving the Constitution, federal laws or treaties, or a “federal party” in which the U.S. government is a party to the case |
| Hear both civil and criminal matters | Hear both civil and criminal matters, although many criminal cases involving federal law are tried in state courts |
| Help the states retain their own sovereignty in judicial matters over their state laws, distinct from the national government | Hear cases that involve “interstate” matters, “diversity of citizenship” involving parties of two different states, or between a U.S. citizen and a citizen of another nation (and with a damage claim of at least $75,000) |
23
23
The courts must wait for cases to be brought before them before they can settle disputes; the courts cannot intervene on their own.
When a case comes before a court, it takes the form of a conflict between parties on each side of the dispute.
Thus, the American legal system is often referred to as an adversary system because it is based on the assumption that the truth will emerge from the clash of opposing interests.
Adversary System
24
To litigate an issue in the federal courts, a plaintiff must have standing to sue.
Although standing can be difficult to define, in general it requires that a person must have suffered some sort of concrete harm or injury.
The U.S. Constitution restricts the role of the courts to hearing only “cases and controversies.”
Federal courts may not issue advisory opinions; the plaintiffs must establish standing, and there must be some real conflict of interest, either criminal or civil, between the parties.
The Role of the Courts
25
The judge is the presiding officer of the court and the expert on all issues of law.
The judge instructs the jury regarding the law that applies in a case and discusses the possible verdicts it may reach.
The judge also pronounces a sentence based on the jury’s verdict or, in the case of a nonjury trial, on the basis of his or her analysis of the facts.
Judges do not simply match the law to the case.
The need to interpret the law has the effect of giving judges a degree of discretion in the application of the law.
The Role of the Judge
26
The United States has a dual-court system: a federal court system and fifty state court systems.
Each court has a, though not necessarily unique, jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is the right of a court to hear a particular type of case.
This right is granted either by a constitution or by a legislative statute. A court’s jurisdiction may be either original or appellate.
Courts that have original jurisdiction are trial courts; they determine the facts of a case as well as the law that applies to them.
The Dual Court System
27
Courts with appellate jurisdiction handle appeals; they review the decisions of the lower courts to determine whether the correct rule of law was applied.
The U.S. Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction.
Its original jurisdiction is stated in Article III of the Constitution, while its appellate jurisdiction is determined by Congress.
Each court system has the right to make the final interpretation of the law in the cases over which it has jurisdiction.
The Dual Court System
28
State court systems vary depending upon the constitution and laws of the particular state.
Most of the states have an appellate court between the trial courts and the highest court in the state.
Almost all states have special courts that deal with family law, wills, and estates (Passaic County Superior Court).
The vast majority of cases brought before a court in the United States are heard at the state court level.
The heavy workload of state courts has led to long backlogs and delays in hearing cases in some jurisdictions.
State Courts
29
Many state court judges are elected directly by the voters, but in recent decades a growing number of states have abandoned the elected method and relied instead on appointment by a governor or mayor.
New Jersey the Governor nominates Superior Court and other State Judges and NJ Supreme Court Justices with the consent of the senate.
New Jersey municipal court judges are appointed by the mayors and serve 3 year terms.
State Courts
30
There are two types of federal courts:
Constitutional
Legislative.
The constitutional courts are established by Congress under the provisions of Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution.
This section allows for a Supreme Court and lower or inferior courts as needed.
The major constitutional courts are the U.S. district courts, the U.S. courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court.
Several other constitutional courts deal with cases in specialized areas, such as international trade, customs, patents, and tariffs.
Federal Courts
31
Legislative courts are created by Congress under Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution, allowing for tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court.
Some of the key legislative courts are the U.S. Tax Court, the U.S. Court of Military Appeals, and the federal territorial courts.
Judges on legislative courts are nominated in the same way as members of the constitutional courts: they are nominated by the president and then appointed through consent of the Senate.
The length of the appointment varies based on congressional decision. Judges on constitutional courts have tenure for life.
Federal Courts
32
There are eighty-nine districts in the fifty states, plus one each in the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories of the United States.
The district courts are the trial courts of the federal judicial system.
They hear both civil and criminal cases.
However, they have only original jurisdiction; they cannot hear appeals.
The U.S. district courts are the busiest of the federal courts, hearing a combined total of more than 350,000 civil and criminal cases during the year ending March 31, 2010.
U.S. District Courts
33
The thirteen courts of appeals are exclusively appellate courts.
Eleven of these courts are regional, covering three or more states.
The twelfth court covers the District of Columbia.
The thirteenth, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is a national court that primarily hears cases involving patents and tariffs.
With the exception of this court, all courts of appeals hear both civil and criminal cases.
The courts of appeals are required to hear all cases coming before them.
The decisions of courts of appeals are extremely influential.
Because the Supreme Court hears only a handful of the cases filed before it, the courts of appeals often make decisions that establish precedent for future decisions of the lower courts.
U.S. Court of Appeals
34
The Supreme Court is the nation’s highest court and the final interpreter of the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, and treaties, giving it enormous power to shape federal law.
The Court is in session from early October until June or July of the following year.
The Supreme Court
Newest Member Amy Coney Barrett
35
The Court has the sole authority to decide which of the many cases appealed to it will be reviewed.
When the Court accepts a case, the attorneys for both parties submit written briefs and present oral arguments.
Oral arguments before the Court can be grueling, as each side may have as little as thirty minutes to present their case, and the justices can (and often do) interrupt their presentations to pose probing questions.
Oral Arguments
36
After hearing oral arguments, the justices meet in private for their conferences, and no official record of their proceedings is kept.
The chief justice presents his own view of the case first, followed by the other members in descending order of seniority.
A final vote on the decision may be taken, though it is often unnecessary as the justices make their opinions known in the conference.
Conferences
37
The Court’s decision in a case is delivered in the majority opinion, authored by one of the justices in the majority.
Writing the majority opinion can sometimes be difficult, as justices may reach the same decision but for different reasons.
Traditionally, when the chief justice is in the majority, he either writes the decision himself (if the case is particularly important) or assigns the case to another justice to write the majority opinion.
If the chief justice is not part of the majority, the responsibility for authoring the decision (or assigning the responsibility to another justice) falls to the justice with the most seniority on the Court.
Opinions
38
Justices who agree with the Court’s decision but do not feel the majority opinion adequately captures their views may choose to write a concurring opinion.
A dissenting opinion may be written by any justice who did not agree with the majority opinion.
The Court’s opinions are the primary means by which the Supreme Court communicates its ideas to the judiciary, the legal profession, and the public.
Opinions
39
The chief justice is “first among equals.”
He or she has only one vote among the nine justices but does have the power to assign the writing of the opinion.
The influence of the chief justice rests in his or her skill in persuading other justices to go along with his or her decisions.
Consequently, chief justices have had varying degrees of power over the years.
Some of the most influential chief justices include John Marshall, Earl Warren, and William Rehnquist.
Role of The Chief Justice
40
Almost all cases heard by the Supreme Court fall within its appellate jurisdiction, meaning that they are appeals from lower court decisions.
Unlike the lower federal courts, however, the Supreme Court has the option of choosing which cases it will hear.
Cases reach the Supreme Court primarily by writ of certiorari, an order directing a lower court to send the record of the case to the Supreme Court for review.
A writ of certiorari is issued if at least four of the nine justices—the Rule of Four—agree that the Court should hear a particular case.
Bringing a Case Before the Court
41
Typically, several thousand petitions for certiorari arrive each year, but the Court accepts only a tiny fraction of the petitions it receives.
While the number of petitions has generally increased, the number of cases decided by the Court with full written opinions has decreased dramatically, to approximately eighty cases per year.
The Courts Workload
42
The president’s power to appoint federal judges enables him to shape the character of the judiciary.
Because federal judges serve lifetime appointments, they continue to influence the American legal system well beyond a president’s term.
Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court and the courts of appeals are particularly important.
Selecting Federal Judges
43
Judges are formally nominated by the president, with the advice and consent of the Senate.
The long-established tradition of senatorial courtesy allows the president and the senior senator—who belongs to the president’s party—from the state where the judge will serve to jointly select that judge.
The Senate Judicial Committee also plays a major role in the nominating process, holding hearings and making recommendations about the selection of new judges to the entire Senate.
The vast majority of presidential nominations to the federal judiciary are approved.
Selecting Judges For Lower Federal Courts
44
George H. W. Bush
Justice David Soutor (Retired)
Justice Clarence Thomas
Bill Clinton
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburgh “Died in Office”
Justice Stephen Breyer
George W. Bush
Chief Justice Roberts
Justice Samual Alito
Barack Obama
Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Justice Elena Kagan
Ronald Reagan
Chief Justice William Rehnquist “Died in Office”
Justice Sandra Day Oconnor (Retired)
Justice Anthony Kennedy
Justice Antonin Scalia “Died in Office”
Supreme Court Appointments 1980 -2020
Late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Donald Trump
Neil Corsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
Amy Coney Barrett
45
Because Supreme Court justices serve for life, appointing them may be the single most important act of a president.
Presidents consider many factors when appointing Supreme Court justices, including race, age, religion, place of residence, political party affiliation, and philosophy when making a Court appointment, but the president will almost always appoint a member of his own party whose judicial philosophy matches his own.
Although presidents usually select justices who have past judicial experience, President Obama made an exception to this rule when he nominated Elena Kagan to be the newest member of the Supreme Court.
Appointing Supreme Court Justices
46
Once the president selects an individual to serve as a Supreme Court justice, the nomination is sent to the Senate, where the nominee must first win the approval of the Senate Judiciary Committee and then the approval of the full Senate in a majority vote.
Rejections are not common; today, nominees withdraw their names from consideration if they suspect they lack sufficient support in the Senate.
The composition of the Court is so critical that when a particular Court is evenly divided between liberal and conservative justices, a single vote on a controversial constitutional question may be crucial in setting the direction of legal interpretation for many years to come.
Confirmation and Tenure
47
The powers of Congress over the courts include the authority to remove federal judges, decrease appropriations for the judiciary, reduce the compensation of future judges, modify the number of justices who serve on the Court, and abolish all federal courts below the Supreme Court that were established by congressional statute.
The Senate also has the power to reject all new appointments to the federal judiciary.
However, it has seldom exercised these powers.
Indeed, Congress has no need to act harshly with the Court. Because the Court has no enforcement power, its decisions may be ignored.
Decisions of the Supreme Court may be changed by legislation or constitutional amendment.
Restrictions on the Court
48
Judicial philosophy may play a role in restricting the power of judges and courts.
The philosophy of judicial self-restraint calls for judges to exercise self-control in the use of judicial power and generally defer to the policies of the elected branches of government.
One form of self-restraint is reliance on textualism: judges should interpret the provisions of a constitution according to the meaning of the language at the time the document was composed.
Not all members of the Supreme Court follow the doctrine of judicial restraint.
Advocates of judicial activism are more willing to establish new rules of public policy, and in general they place less reliance on the decisions of legislative bodies.
This philosophy is more likely to think of the Constitution as a living document.
Restrictions on the Court
49
THE END
50
