Unit 2: Interactions Among Branches of Government Lecture & Discussion 7: The National Judiciary

Enduring Understanding The design of the judicial branch protects the independence of the Supreme Court and the use of judicial review remains a powerful practice.

Objective(s) To explain the principle of judicial review and how it checks the power of the other federal institutions and state governments.

Do Now Read excerpts from “Federalist 78” and respond to the prompts. Why does Hamilton believe that judges should have permanent tenure? Why is the judiciary the “least dangerous” department? What does this view suggest about the framers’ perceptions of the three branches of government? What is the court’s duty? How does it check the power of the other branches?

A. Federal Court System Article III: establishes and vests judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court Congress has authority to setup inferior courts: constitutional courts include district courts and courts of appeals judges of the Supreme Court and constitutional courts “shall hold their offices during good Behavior” (life tenure)

“Pyramid” of Federal Courts

A. Federal Court System Selecting Federal Judges President nominates a “qualified” person, who is confirmed by the Senate senatorial courtesy: an unwritten tradition whereby the Senate will not confirm a district court judge if opposed by the senior senator from the state in which the nominee will serve litmus test: Presidents tend to nominate judges who reflect their own political ideology

A. Federal Court System Jurisdiction of Federal Courts dual court system: federal and state courts Constitution grants authority over certain types of cases to federal courts (all other matters left to state courts)

“Federal Question” Cases Involve… A. Federal Court System “Federal Question” Cases Involve…   the United States government the United States Constitution or federal laws controversies between States controversies between the United States and foreign governments 

“Diversity” Cases Involve… A. Federal Court System “Diversity” Cases Involve…   citizens of different states U.S. citizens and those of another country damages of $75,000+

Dual Court System

B. Supreme Court in Action Getting to the Court cases may reach the U.S. Supreme Court in three ways (original or appellate jurisdiction): most cases heard on appeal from lower court writ of certiorari: an order by the Supreme Court directing a lower court to send up a case for review if the case is under the Court’s original jurisdiction an appeal of a decision made in a state supreme court an appeal of a decision made in a federal Court of Appeals

B. Supreme Court in Action Hearing the Case briefs: documents that set forth the facts, summarize lower-court’s decision, state arguments, and discuss relevant cases lawyers present oral arguments; then, justices debate case in secrecy opinion: a written explanation of decision dissenting opinion: a signed statement in which one or more justices disagree with the majority opinion opinion of the Court: a signed statement that reflects the majority view of the Supreme Court concurring opinion: a signed statement in which one or more members agree with the majority view but for different reason

C. Power to Make Policy Judicial Review the principle by which the Court can declare laws and executive acts unconstitutional established by Marbury v. Madison, 1803

C. Power to Make Policy Judicial Review judicial activism: an approach to judicial review which holds that judges should discover the general principles underlying the Constitution and apply them to modern circumstances judicial restraint: an approach to judicial review which holds that judges should decide cases strictly on the basis of the language of the laws and the Constitution

C. Power to Make Policy Overturning Precedent stare decisis: an informal doctrine by which judges look at past decisions to guide rulings on cases with similar issues or circumstances Court decisions establish precedents, which provide continuity in interpreting rule of law change in ideological composition of Court due to presidential appointment, however, can establish new or reject existing precedent

C. Power to Make Policy 3. Justiciable Disputes political question: a doctrine that holds if an issue is fundamentally political, not legal, the Court will refuse the case and leave for the executive and legislative branches to settle notion is less important as Court is “willing” to handle what has increasingly become more legal, rather than political, matters

C. Power to Make Policy Judicial Relief remedy: a judicial order setting forth what must be done to correct a situation that a judge believes to be wrong Court orders often involve monetary compensation, but can also be based on interpretations of Constitution or federal laws as they pertain to civil rights

Supreme Court Speaks Legal scholars consider the case Marbury v. Madison (1803) a central text for understanding the role of the Court to interpret law in light of the Constitution, known as judicial review.

Supreme Court Speaks Directions: Read the case summary for Marbury v. Madison (1803) Respond to the prompts. Complete a case brief that includes the facts, arguments, decision, opinions, and precedent.

Supreme Court Speaks Marbury v. Madison (1803): the U.S. Supreme Court first declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review.