1. Congress, The Presidency, The Bureaucracy, The Judiciary
Agree or disagree: “Boston Bomber” should be tried in a civil court? Should the trial be moved out of Massachusetts? Discuss in the chat box.
Please sign in with your first and last names.

2. Objective
To review the judicial branch.

3. Where do you fall?
Place a symbol

4. What do you know about the federal court system
Brain Dump
What do you know about the federal court system

6. Development of the Federal Courts
Jurisdiction
Exclusive: sole authority of federal courts
Constitution, federal law, treaty
Admiralty/maritime law
Disputes between states
US government is a party
Citizens of different states
Ambassadors/diplomats
A state as a party
Concurrent: both federal and state courts
Original: authority of a court to first try a case
Appellate: court that hears a subsequent appeal

7. Development of the Federal Courts, cont.
Traditional view that judges would find and apply existing law
Based on what the law required
Judicial activism argued that judges make the laws
Founders were able to justify power of judicial review – courts would have a neutral role in government

8. Development of the Federal Courts, cont.
Hamilton argued that courts could decide whether a law is contrary to the constitution

9. What were the main types of cases dealt with the courts in the time periods below? Examples.:
1865 – 1937:
1938 – present
Legitimacy of the federal gov’t and slavery
1865 – 1937: relationship between government and the economy
1938 – present: personal liberty and social equality

10. Development of the Federal Courts, cont.
National Supremacy and Slavery
Under John Marshall, national law was deemed to be dominant law is all instances
Supreme Court had right to determine what the Constitution meant
Marbury v. Madison, 1803
McCulloch v. Maryland, 1819
Supreme Court could declare an act of Congress unconstitutional
Federal government flows from people, laws necessary to attain constitutional ends are permissible
Federal law is supreme
Dred Scott
Roger Taney wrote that slaves are not citizens and so federal laws affecting slavery were unconstitutional

11. Development of the Federal Courts, cont.
Government and the Economy
Favor of private property
Focus of the 14th amendment shifted from black citizenship to protection of corporations (big business)
Blockage of anti-trust, regulatory legislations
Ruled against labor unions/strikes

12. Development of the Federal Courts, cont.
Government and Political Liberty
Change in focus and priorities of the justices
Earl Warren redefined relationship of citizens to government and protection from government infringement

13. The Structure of the Federal Courts
MATCH
A. Established by the Constitution
B. Established by Congress
1. Supreme Court
2. Federal Courts

14. The Structure of the Federal Courts
Explain the Types of law
Statutory
Common
Criminal
Civil

15. The Structure of the Federal Courts
Types of law
Statutory – deals with written statues (laws)
Common
Based upon a system of written law
Based upon precedents - state decisis
Criminal
Violations of criminal code
Violations against society
Civil
Disputes between two parties
Breach on contract, slander, malpractice
Writ of mandamus – court order for one party to perform a certain act
Injunction – prohibits a party to act
Class action lawsuit

16. How are judges selected?

17. The Structure of the Federal Courts
Selecting Judges
Constitutional judges have life terms – selected by President, approved by Senate (usually represent President’s party)
Party, etc. does not always predict ruling – base on facts of case, arguments, etc.
Primarily male (Sandra Day O’ Conner 1st female)
Senatorial Courtesy
Senate usually approves if Senators from state of nominee approve
Not existent for Supreme Court
Litmus Test – judges as representative of President’s views?

19. The Structure of the Federal Courts
The Jurisdiction of the Federal Courts
Dual Court System
One state, one federal
There are different cases for each
Some cases fall under both jurisdictions and can be tried in either or both
Appellate Jurisdiction
Lower federal courts
Highest state courts
Writ of Certiorari
Way of petitioning Supreme Court to hear appeal
If four justices agree, cert is issued and the case is scheduled – rule of four
Look for constitutional issue

20. The Structure of the Federal Courts
Going to Court
Fee Shifting
Sovereign Immunity
Standing – being entitled to have a case
Controversy
Show harm

21. The Structure of the Federal Courts
The Supreme Court in Action
The “Supreme Court is a constitutional convention in continuous session” – Woodrow Wilson
Lawyers submit briefs
Arguments in court ~ 30 minutes; questions from justices
Government is represented by the solicitor general
Voting patterns of the Court
Fairly consistent positions
Voting ‘blocs’
Complex factors of case
Interpretation of laws

22. The Structure of the Federal Courts
The Supreme Court Decision Making
Simple majority determines case
If a tie, previous court decision stands
Majority opinion - expresses view of majority
Dissenting – expresses opinion of minority
Concurring – agrees with majority but for different reasons
Opinions are how the Supreme Court communicates with public

23. The Structure of the Federal Courts
The Power of the Federal Courts
The power to make policy
Via interpretation of Constitution, enforcement of laws
By interpreting law are actually making law
Declaration of laws being Constitutional or not
Stare decisis – let the decision stand
Courts take on matters once left to the legislature
More than 1000 state laws declared unconstitutional
More than 130 federal laws as unconstitutional

24. The Structure of the Federal Courts
Views of Judicial Activism
It is the courts responsibility to act when other branches haven't
Decisions have huge impact/on society
The court should be restricted to constitutional outline of authority – judicial restraint
The justices are lawyers, not managers
Special treatment for one group affects all groups
Legislation and the Courts
When laws are vague, judges have greater power for interpretation
Some laws induce litigation
Judges determine own role

25. What is this cartoon saying?

26. Question
In Marbury v. Madison (1803), the Supreme Court assumed the power to
(A) decide whether internal congressional procedures are constitutional
(B) advise Congress on the constitutionality of a proposed by law
(C) regulate slavery
(D) decide on the constitutionality of a law or an executive action
(E) approve executive agreements

27. Answer
In Marbury v. Madison (1803), the Supreme Court assumed the power to
(A) decide whether internal congressional procedures are constitutional
(B) advise Congress on the constitutionality of a proposed by law
(C) regulate slavery
(D) decide on the constitutionality of a law or an executive action
(E) approve executive agreements

28. Question
Which of the following best defines the term “judicial activism”?
(A) The demands on judges to hear large numbers of cases
(B) The efforts of judges to lobby Congress for funds
(C) The attempts by judges to influence election outcomes
(D) The unwillingness of judges to remove themselves from cases in which they have a personal interest
(E) The tendency of judges to interpret the Constitution according to their own views

29. Answer
Which of the following best defines the term “judicial activism”?
(A) The demands on judges to hear large numbers of cases
(B) The efforts of judges to lobby Congress for funds
(C) The attempts by judges to influence election outcomes
(D) The unwillingness of judges to remove themselves from cases in which they have a personal interest
(E) The tendency of judges to interpret the Constitution according to their own views

30. Question
All of the following serve as checks on the power of federal courts EXCEPT:
(A) Federal judges can be impeached
(B) The voters can oust federal judges in national elections
(C) Congress can pass a law clarifying “legislative intent”
(D) Presidents, governors, and local executives can refrain from enforcing court rulings
(E) Congress and state legislatures can amend the Constitution

31. Answer
All of the following serve as checks on the power of federal courts EXCEPT:
(A) Federal judges can be impeached
(B) The voters can oust federal judges in national elections
(C) Congress can pass a law clarifying “legislative intent”
(D) Presidents, governors, and local executives can refrain from enforcing court rulings
(E) Congress and state legislatures can amend the Constitution

32. Question The doctrine of original intent holds that
(A) Supreme Court justices must emphasize independent and original thinking in considering constitutional matters
(B) the meaning of the Constitution depends on the intention of the framers
(C) cases selected for review by the Supreme Court must address an original and new concern not previously addressed by the Court
(D) Supreme Court justices should avoid bias by documenting their original impressions of a case
(E) the Supreme Court should review all treaties that alter previously established foreign policy

33. Answer The doctrine of original intent holds that
(A) Supreme Court justices must emphasize independent and original thinking in considering constitutional matters
(B) the meaning of the Constitution depends on the intention of the framers
(C) cases selected for review by the Supreme Court must address an original and new concern not previously addressed by the Court
(D) Supreme Court justices should avoid bias by documenting their original impressions of a case
(E) the Supreme Court should review all treaties that alter previously established foreign policy

34. Question
A major reason why the majority of Supreme Court justices have had political experience prior to appointment to the Court is that
(A) justices are expected to act like politicians in their decision-making
(B) Presidents seek to place individuals on the Court whose policy views are similar to their own
(C) the Senate will refuse to confirm any nominee to the Court who is not familiar with the political process
(D) appointment to the Supreme Court is a reward for political party loyalty
(E) the Court is expected to defer to the political branches in making its decisions

35. Answer
A major reason why the majority of Supreme Court justices have had political experience prior to appointment to the Court is that
(A) justices are expected to act like politicians in their decision-making
(B) Presidents seek to place individuals on the Court whose policy views are similar to their own
(C) the Senate will refuse to confirm any nominee to the Court who is not familiar with the political process
(D) appointment to the Supreme Court is a reward for political party loyalty
(E) the Court is expected to defer to the political branches in making its decisions

36. 2005 FRQ-Judicial Branch
Judicial Branch – Supreme Court rarely deviates too far from prevalent public opinion
a) describe 2 things that insulate the Supreme Court from public opinion
b) describe 2 things that keep the Supreme Court from deviating for too long
6 points
Part (a): 2 points
One point is earned for each of the two descriptions. Th
e response must correctly describe two features of
the Supreme Court that insulate it from public opinion.
The description must identify each feature and add
an additional clause or sentence that is factually co
rrect and relevant to the identification. This may be an
example or illustration. The response must also link
each feature to public opinion. Congress may be used
as a surrogate for public opinion, but the President cannot be used unless explicitly linked to public
opinion.
Acceptable descriptions may include: •
“Appointed” or “not elected.”
Serve life terms.
Court’s ability to control its own docket/set its own agenda.
Salaries cannot be reduced.
Limited access to Court proceedings.
Descriptions that are not acceptable include:
The Court’s role as interpreter of laws/Constitution.
The fact that the Court accepts only legitimate controversies.
Part (b): 4 points
Two points are earned for each of the two explanations. The response must explain how or why each
identified factor keeps the Supreme Court from
deviating too far from public opinion.
Acceptable explanations may include:
The appointment and/or confirmation process (no point is given if the response says that the House
confirms, but if the response says Congress confirms, this is acceptable). If the appointment and
confirmation processes are fully discussed as two SEPARATE processes, the response may earn
points for both.
Reliance on other public officials to execute decisions.
The fact that the Supreme Court can be overrule
d with new laws or constitutional amendments.
(“New laws” do not include Congress’s
general power to write legislation.)
The concern for reputation—individual reputation and/or that of the Supreme Court. Concern for
credibility/legitimacy of the institution falls into this category.
The potential for the impeachment of justices.
Congressional control of the Supreme Court’s appella
te jurisdiction and/or changing the number of
justices on the Court.
(p. 2)

37. Where do you fall?
Place a symbol

38. Questions?