The Judicial BranchCh 11

Purpose of CourtsA. Resolve legal disputes by applying the law to individual situations1. Criminal law: the people vs. an individual2. Civil law: an individual vs. another individual

***Please note that a legal individual does NOT have to be a human being. A legal individual can be an individual, a business, a corporation, a government agency.***

B. Major players1. Criminal lawa. Prosecutorrepresents the people b. Defendantindividual accused of breaking law2. Civil lawa. Plaintiffindividual who was wrongedb. Defendantindividual accused of wrongdoing*All people involved in a court case that appear before the court (prosecutors defendants and plaintiffs) are called a litigants.

3. Judgea. Applies the lawb. Instructs the juryc. Keeps proceedings fair and neutrald. May decide case if no jury (aka Bench Trial)4. Jurya. Decides facts of caseb. Determines innocence or guilt

PrecedentA ruling that sets guidelines for future similar casesJurisdiction1. Define: a courts right to hear a case2. Original jurisdiction (aka: trial court)a. First time a case is heardb. Establishes facts of case/determines innocence or guilt3. Appellate jurisdictiona. Higher court that reviews trial court decisionsb. Does NOT retry the case; only determines if1. Original proceedings were fair2. Law was correctly applied

State courts1. Deal with state laws2. Three levelsa. Trial courtsb. Appellate courts (aka courts of appeal)c. State supreme court (aka court of final appeal)3. Cases may be appealed to the USSC if a federal or constitutional issue is involved

Federal Courts1. Original jurisdiction over federal issuesa. Federal lawsb. Constitutional issuesc. Resident of one state v resident of another stated. Treatiese. Maritime issuesf. Foreign govt is involvedg. US govt is involved2. Three levelsa. Trial court (aka District Court)b. Appellate court (aka Court of Appeals)c. Supreme Court (aka Court of Final Appeal)

The Federal Court SystemA. The Judiciary Act of 1789Established the federal court system by dividing the country into federal judicial districts, creating district courts and courts of appeals

District Courts1. 94 across the country and US territoriesa. 89 throughout the states according to population distributionb. 1 each in1. D.C.2. Puerto Rico3. Guam4. US Virgin Islands5. Mariana Islands2. Original jurisdiction over federal cases 3. Territory District Courts also have original jurisdiction over local cases

Courts of Appeals (aka Circuit Courts)1. 13 across countrya. 12 hear appeals from district courtsb. 1 hears appeals from1. Special courts like claims court,tax court, etc2. Federal agencies like Office of Patents and Trademarks, Civil Service Commission, etc

Federal Judges 1. Appointed by presidenta. Advisors recommend candidatesb. Professional backgroundc. Political/social viewsd. Collegiate career2. Confirmed by Senatea. Judiciary committee holds hearingsb. Professional backgroundc. Political/social viewsd. Simple majority vote

Life termsa. Death b. Resignation/retirement c. Impeachment4. Balance rights of individual vs. common good

United States Supreme Court A. Judicial Review1. Define: Power to overturn any Act of Congress or executive action the Court deems unconstitutional2. Is it in the Constitution? Not specifically stated; however, the Constitution says the Court shall interpret the law

Established by Marbury v Madison (1803)a. Facts of the case: Marbury appointed to federal judgeship by outgoing Pres John Adams.New Pres TJ tells Sec State Madison NOT to deliver letter of appointment (Marbury cant take his new job)Marbury sued in USSC citing right to do so in Fed Jud Act of 1789b. Justices considered both facts of case and law in question

USSC issued opinion:Marbury was legally appointed as fed judge and Sec State Madison should deliver letter BUT the part of the Fed Jud Act of 1789 that said the USSC would hear this type of case is unconstitutional.The Constitution lists specific type cases the USSC has original jurisdiction over. This was not one of them. SO, because that part of law was unconstitutional, Marbury shouldnt have sued in USSC and USSC doesnt have authority to make Madison deliver the letter.

Precedent set: THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT ISFirst time Court interpreted the Constitution to the extent of declaring part of a law unconstitutional. This put the Jud Branch on equal footing with Leg and Exec branches because the Court has the power to declare acts of the others unconstitutional.***The US STILL has arguments over this issue!! Many people recognize this as constitutional, but many others say the Constitution is black and white and NOT subject to anyones interpretationincluding the USSC

Justices1. Appointed by presidenta. Advisors recommend candidatesb. Professional backgroundc. Political/social viewsd. Collegiate career2. Confirmed by Senatea. Judiciary cmte holds hearingsb. Professional backgroundc. Political/social viewsd. Simple majority vote

Life termsa. Death b. Resignation/retirement c. ImpeachmentWhy it matters!!Conservative presidents = conservative justices Liberal presidents = liberal justicesJustices serve for yearsJustices interpret the Constitution; set precedentThose precedents affect all Americans

A day in the life . . .1. Calendara. Term: first Monday in October end of Juneb. Sittings: 2-wk sessions when Justices hear cases then retire to decide opinions2. Selecting casesa. Original jurisdiction casesmust hear these1. State govt v state govt2. Foreign rep a party in a caseb. Appellate jurisdiction caseschoose to hear1. Must deal with federal or constitutional issue2. Must impact a majority of citizens

Rule of Fourfour of the nine justices must agree to hear the indv case out of the 1000s of cases appealed to them.

Case is on the docket (aka a courts schedule or calendar)Briefs are submittedwritten summary of each lawyers side of the caseJustices study lower court proceedings and briefsOral arguments1. Each side gets 30 mins to argue 2. Justices get to ask questions

Deliberationsa. CJ summarizes case and main points b. Group discussion, each presents views c. Justices votesimple majority wins5. Opinions issued a. Define: written statement explaining ruling and reasons for reaching that decision b. Majority opinion: winning decision, sets precedent c. Concurring opinion: agree with majority opinion but for different reasons d. Dissenting opinion (aka minority opinion): disagree with majority opinion

Factors influencing the Court1. Constitutionfundamental law of US 2. Precedentare there past similar cases 3. Intentof the Constitution and law(s) in question 4. Social valueswhat is the current view of most Americans (will of the people) 5. Personal judicial philosophyto what extent should justices become involved in setting policy

JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY: An ongoing discussion in American politics about the extent to which justices/judges should involve themselves with setting policy. Judges dont make laws so how does a judge set policy?JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: the Jud branch is an equal partner with the Leg and Exec and should be actively involved in interpreting and applying laws. Strong belief in judicial review.JUDICIAL RESTRAINT: the Jud branch should let the Leg and Exec branches set policy and only get involved if that policy is a flagrant violation of Constitution. Not a strong belief in judicial review.*NEITHER VIEW IS LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE*

Checks on the Court1. Executive: pres appoints conservative or liberal justices/judges depending on his beliefs2. Legislative: Senate confirms appointees based on its majoritys beliefs3. Amendment process: a. How is this a check? USSC makes decision people REALLY dont like. People persuade Congress to propose a constitutional amendment. If ratified by the states, it nullifies the USSC decision.

b. Examples 1. Dred Scott (1857) decision: Slave was property and not free just because he had lived in a free state. As property, and not a US citizen, he had no right to sue in federal court.14th Amendment (1868) : Declared former slaves to be US citizens with all rights of citizenship. This amendment nullified the Dred Scott decision.

Abortion???? Flag burning???? Gay marriage???? Stem cell research????

*****PLEASE NOTE*****The president CANNOT propose a constitutional amendment. WHY??