Michelle PalaroCJUS 2360Fall 2015

Chapter 3

The U.S. Supreme Court: The Final

Word

The law that is set forth from the Supreme

Court is the law of the land, and no other

judicial or political body can overrule its

decisions

However, the Supreme Court can overrule

itself

o When it reverses old case decisions

• Ex. the death penalty

Article III of the Constitution established

the Federal judiciary

1789 - The Federal Judiciary Act

established the Supreme Court

o The number of justices have varied

o Since 1869 the number of justices has

been set at 9

Has jurisdiction over 2 general types of cases:

o Cases that reach it on appeal

• Whether the case begins in the state or federal

system, the path to appeal a case is the same

o Cases over which the Court has original jurisdiction

(meaning that it can start at the Supreme Court)

• State v. State

• A state court could not remain unbiased if its

state was a party to the suit

• Cases dealing with foreign dignitaries

Can hear appeals from lower state andfederal courts on issues involvinginterpretation of the law or the applicabilityof the Constitution

Can also hear appeals on cases dealingwith treaties the U.S. has entered into,admiralty and maritime cases or thoseinvolving public officials and politicalentities

Federal Courts do not have carte blanche.

Congress can limit the jurisdiction of the

federal courts.

Congress can affect the jurisdictional

authority of the federal courts by

determining the types of cases they can

hear.

The power of a court to analyze decisions of

other government entities and lower courts

The Supreme Court can decide which laws and

lower court decisions are constitutional

The Supreme Court has effectively created

most of its own power and authority through the

process of judicial review

Marbury v. Madison (1803)o First time the Supreme Court nullified a provision of

federal law or an act of Congress, and can do so to anylaw and acts of Congress that in their view (judge’s)violates the Constitution

Fletcher v. Peck (1810) *See next slide

o The Supreme Court extended its review authority beyond

federal law to state laws

Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816) *See slide

o The Supreme Court determined that it can review and

reverse state court decisions that involved federal law and

constitutional issues and can review pending state cases

Brief video on case:

Facts: In 1795, every legislator in Georgia was bribed to

permit the sale of 30 million acres of land at less than two

cents per acre. The outraged public voted them out of office

and a new legislature passed a law in 1796 nullifying the

transaction

Issues: Is a law that negates all property rights established

under an earlier law unconstitutional?

Holding: Yes

Rationale: Violates the Contract Clause (Article I, Section

10) of the United States Constitution. The court held that the

1796 law was an unconstitutional ex post facto law that

sought to penalize bona fide purchasers for wrongs

committed by those from whom they were purchasing

Facts: The state of Virginia enacted legislation during the

Revolutionary War that gave the State the power to

confiscate the property of British Loyalists. Hunter was given

a grant of land by the State. Denny Martin held the land

under devise from Lord Thomas Fairfax

Issues: Does the U.S. Supreme Court have appellate

jurisdiction over state court decisions involving federal law?

Holding: Yes

Rationale: The federal power was given directly by the

people and not by the States. Article III, Section 2, Clause 2

of the U.S. Constitution states that “in all other cases before

mentioned the Supreme Court shall have appellate

jurisdiction”

Some say that judges have too much power

o They propose alternatives to judicial review

Proponents of judicial review argue that there

needs to be a watchdog to maintain the

constitutionality of law

Debate is ongoing as to who should have the

final say as to what law is constitutional

The Supreme Court’s decision to review a case

is almost entirely discretionary

o May review a case if federal appeals court

request the Courts to “certify” or clarify a legal

point

o Obligated to hear certain cases meeting the

requirements for an “appeal of right”

• They occur infrequently

Cases heard occur through the writ of certiorari

- “to be informed” which cases are worthy of

review on the basis of their national importance

Any case that doesn't have at least one justice

expressing interest in it is summarily denied

o This accounts for 70% of cases submitted

• Current dockets show 10,000 petitions filed every

year

• Formal written opinions are delivered by the

Supreme Court in approximately 80-90 cases each

year

4 out of the 9 justices must vote in favor of granting

certiorari for a case to be accepted for review

o When denied, the lower court’s decision will stand

Facts: The petitioner was the subject of an anonymous

phone tip to the police about a man in a “striped shirt” and a

certain type of car with a certain partial plate driving down a

certain street and that he was intoxicated. He asserts his

Fourth Amendment rights were violated

Issues: The question is whether police can make traffic

stops on the basis of anonymous tips, even when they

themselves have not observed any offending behavior

Holding: Yes

Rationale: Chief Justice Roberts said that “this court has in

fact recognized that the dangers posed by drunk drivers are

unique, frequently upholding anti-drunk-driving policies that

might be constitutionally problematic in other, less exigent

circumstances”

1 chief justice and 8 associate justices

Nominated by the President and confirmed by the

Senate

Lifetime appointment

o Their jobs can never be held over their head

Can be removed from office on impeachment for and

conviction of treason, bribery, or other high crimes and

misdemeanors

o Complex process and has only happened once in history

(Samuel Chase)

Can be either Liberal or Conservative

o Liberal - Decisions are pro-personaccused or convicted of a crime, pro-civil liberties or civil rights, pro-NativeAmerican and anti-government

o Conservative - Favor government’sinterest in prosecuting and punishingoffenders over recognition or expansionof rights for individuals

The Warren Court

o 1953-1969, Liberal by majority

The Burger Court

o 1969-1986, also considered Liberal

The Rehnquist Court

o 1986-2005, more Conservative stance

The Roberts’ Court

o 2005 - present, Conservative in makeup but will see

how the justices rule on important issues

• Affordable Health Care Act

• Affirmative Action programs

The Supreme Court is a political body

o This is why the Constitution gives the

power of appointing justices to the

President

Once appointed, the justices are not

accountable to anyone

o Politics may have helped them get their

job but this is where it ends

Court conducts business in a traditional manner

Begins on the 1st Monday of October,

continuing until June or July

Terms are made up of sittings, when cases are

heard, and recesses, considers administrative

matters at hand and justices write their opinions

Opinions are:o “A written statement by a judge providing a description of the

facts; a statement of the legal issues presented for decision, the

relevant rules of law, the holding and the policies and reasons

that support the holding”

.

Chief justice assigns the writing of an opinion ifvoting with the majority

o Otherwise it is the most senior member of themajority vote who assigns who writes it

This opinion can be either:

o Concurring opinion - agreeing with the majority

o Dissenting opinion - disagreeing with themajority and the reasons underlying thedisagreement

o Any justice is free to write an opinion even if notassigned