Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
1
14: The Federal Judicial System
Applying the Law
2
The Role and Powers of the Judiciary
English Legal Traditions Adversary process Appeals Court of appeals Criminal case Civil suit Common law Precedents Adversary process Confrontational legal process under which each party presents its version of events. Appeals Legal proceeding whereby the decision of a lower court on a question of law can be challenged and reviewed by a higher court. Court of appeals Intermediate federal courts that are above the district courts and below the Supreme Court. Criminal case Government prosecution of an individual for breaking the law. Civil suit Lawsuit by a person, organization, or government against another person, organization, or government. Common law Judge-made law in England and the United States that results from gaps in statutory law. Precedents Practice of reaching decisions based on the previous decisions of other judges. Key Questions Do courts produce the fairest decision possible? Can you give examples? If you recognize an injustice but have not been harmed by it, how can you get government to respond? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
3
The Federal Judicial System
Constitution of the United States established the judiciary as a separate and independent branch Also established the U.S. Supreme Court Gave Congress the power to establish lower federal courts All federal judges are nominated and appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate No age, residency, or citizenship requirements are delineated in the Constitution Judges “hold their offices during good behavior”
4
The Role and Powers of the Judiciary
Constitutional Grants of Power District (trial) courts Jurisdiction Judicial review Marbury v. Madison District (trial) courts Federal trial courts at the bottom of the federal judicial hierarchy. Jurisdiction Lawful authority of a court to hear a case. Judicial review Authority of courts to declare laws passed by Congress and acts of the executive branch to be unconstitutional. Marbury v. Madison An 1803 Supreme Court decision that established the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
5
The Supreme Court of the United States
Original jurisdiction: the authority to be the first court to hear a case Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction: Disputes involving foreign diplomats Suits between states
6
The Supreme Court of the United States (2)
Appellate jurisdiction: the authority to review cases that have already been heard Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction: Cases arising under the Constitution, federal law and regulations, and treaties Appeals to legal controversies that cross state or national boundaries
7
Selecting and Deciding Cases
Selecting a case: Losing party in a lower court case appeals If at least four justices agree to hear the case, the Court issues a writ of certiorari—a request for a record of the case Court seldom accepts routine cases Accepts fewer than 100 cases each year There must be “compelling reasons” for accepting a case About three-fourths of Supreme Court decisions reverse the lower court’s judgment
8
Figure 14-1 The Supreme Court’s Docket
The Supreme Court accepts only a small fraction of the roughly 8,000 cases appealed to it each year. The Court normally agrees to hear only those cases that have broad legal significance. Source: Supreme Court of the United States. Figures based on yearly average for 1990–2015 period.
9
State and Lower Federal Courts
Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. State and Lower Federal Courts State Courts in the Federal Judicial System En banc Writ of habeas corpus Petition for a writ of certiorari En banc Decision by an entire Court of Appeals circuit, typically following an original judgment by a three-judge panel of the circuit. Petition for a writ of certiorari Request to the Supreme Court that it review a lower court case.
10
State and Lower Federal Courts
Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. State and Lower Federal Courts The Courts of Appeals Sit above district courts Mandatory jurisdiction over cases appealed to them Majority opinion Majority opinion Opinion of a court laying out the official position of the court in the case.
11
Figure 14-2 The Federal Judicial System
The simplified diagram shows the relationships among the various levels of federal courts and between state and federal courts. The losing party in a case can appeal a lower-court decision to the court at the next-highest level, as the arrows indicate. Decisions normally cannot be moved from state courts to federal courts unless they raise a U.S. constitutional issue, such as whether a defendant’s right to a fair trial has been violated. Jump to long image description
12
The Supreme Court Granting Review Oral Arguments Grant of cert
Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved. The Supreme Court Granting Review Grant of cert Rule of four Oral Arguments Most influential briefs from solicitor general Thirty minutes allowed Rule of four Supreme Court rule that grants review to a case if as few as four of the justices support review. Key Questions Should the federal government be allowed to try to influence a court decision? Why did the Office of the Solicitor General switch positions on the Michigan affirmative action cases between 2000 and 2001?
13
Selecting and Deciding Cases (2)
Supreme Court hearing: Attorney for each side presents oral argument, typically limited to 30 minutes Each also provides a written brief Only the nine justices attend the judicial conference, where the case is discussed and the justices vote Proceedings are secret, allowing the justices to speak freely
14
Issuing Decisions and Opinions
Decision: indicates which party won the case Opinion: explains the legal basis for the decision Opinion types: Majority opinion: a majority agree on the legal basis Plurality opinion: a majority agree on the decision, but they disagree on the legal basis Concurring opinion: a separate view by a justice who agrees with the majority but disagrees with at least some of the reasoning Dissenting opinion: one or more justices on the losing side explain the reason they disagree with the majority position
15
Other Federal Courts There are 94 U.S. district courts
Lowest of the federal courts Chief trial courts of the federal system There are 13 U.S. courts of appeals These courts hear appeals from the district courts Eleven of the courts have jurisdiction over geographical “circuits” One has jurisdiction over the District of Columbia One has jurisdiction over patents and international trade Courts of appeals offer the only real hope of reversal for most appellants
16
Figure 14-3 Geographic Boundaries of U.S. Courts Of Appeals
The United States has 13 courts of appeals, each of which serves a “circuit.” Eleven of these circuit courts serve anywhere from three to nine states, as the map shows. The other two are located in the District of Columbia: the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which specializes in appeals involving patents and international trade. Within each circuit are federal trial courts, most of which are district courts. Each state has at least one district court within its boundaries. Larger states, such as California (which has four district courts, as can be seen on the map), have more than one. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts.
17
The State Courts Each state has its own court system and decides the structure of its courts and selection of judges Election of judges is the most common form In some states the governor appoints judges Other states use the merit plan (or “Missouri Plan”) Governor or legislature appoints judges from a list of acceptable candidates Retention election decides whether a judge stays in office More than 95 percent of the nation’s legal cases are decided by state or local courts
18
Principal Methods of Selecting State Judges
The states use a variety of methods for selecting judges on their highest court, including the merit system, election, and political appointment. Source: The Council of State Governments. Reprinted with permission.
19
Federal Court Appointees
President selects nominees and the Senate confirms Appointment of federal judges is a partisan issue Federal judges and justices are not free of political views, and the courtroom gives them an opportunity to promote their beliefs
20
The Appointment Process for Federal Judges and Justices
Impeachment of Samuel Chase Impeached due to politics but not removed by the Senate thus saving the courts from political interference: Judicial independence The District Courts Increasingly partisan confirmation environment The Courts of Appeals Judicial independence Why does the United States need judicial independence? Key Questions Describe the lasting impact of Supreme Court appointments. Is the judicial appointment process fair? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
21
The Appointment Process for Federal Judges and Justices
The Supreme Court Appointments for electoral advantage Nomination hearings carefully scripted Ethics considered Demographic Diversity on the Court All white males until 1967 Currently, none have held elective office before Key Questions Should judicial appointments be subject to partisanship? Should judges be appointed without regard to race, ethnic background, gender, or religion? What are the effects of televising congressional Judiciary Committee hearings? Should public opinion affect judicial appointments? Does diversity on the Court matter? Should the Supreme Court be age diverse? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
22
Ideology and Partisanship in the Roberts and Sotomayor Votes
Figure 15.7 Every Republican voted to confirm John Roberts for Chief Justice, while moderate Democrats were more likely to support him than liberal Democrats. Similarly, all Democrats voted to confirm Sonia Sotomayor for Associate Justice, while moderate Republicans were more likely to support her than conservative Republicans. © Cengage Learning Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
23
Supreme Court Nominees
Nominations allow a president to influence judicial policy for years, sometimes decades Presidents nominate those with a similar political philosophy George H. W. Bush replaced a very liberal justice (Marshall) with a very conservative one (Thomas) Most nominee rejections occurred before 1900 With an open seat on the Court, a tie may result, in which case the lower court decision is upheld
24
Lower-Court Nominees Task of identifying nominees is often delegated to the deputy attorney general Presidents typically nominate members of their own political party Nominees must be confirmed by the Senate Senatorial courtesy: a tradition holding that a senator from the state with the vacancy should be consulted and can request confirmation be denied
25
Personal Backgrounds of Judicial Appointees
White males are overrepresented Women and minority-group members have made substantial gains in recent decades Most have been appointed by Democratic presidents About two-thirds of Obama’s appointees are in this group Supreme Court has also become more demographically representative Supreme Court’s diversity of experience has diminished Most appointees today come from the appellate courts
26
Number of Federal Laws Declared Unconstitutional 1790-2013
Figure 15.4 The Supreme Court declared one federal law unconstitutional in the 2010 term, one in the 2011 term two in the 2012 term, and one in the 2013 term. Source: Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, eds., Vital Statistics on American Politics, 3rd ed. (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1992); Lawrence Baum, The Supreme Court, 8th ed. (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2004), 170, 173; Harold J. Spaeth, Lee Epstein, Andrew D. Martin, Jeffrey A. Segal, and Thomas W. Walker, United States Supreme Court Database, scdb.wustl.edu. Jeffrey A. Segal, © Cengage Learning. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
27
Judicial Decision Making
Judicial Restraint: The Legal Approach Reliance on precedent Plain meaning of the law being interpreted Intent of the Framers Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
28
Judicial Decision Making
Judicial Activism: The Extralegal Approach The Justices’ preferences Strategic considerations Preferences of other justices and those in political environment Restraint and Activism in Judicial Decision Making Agree with legislature when consistent with ideology Key Questions What role should ideology play in judicial decisions? What role does it play? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
29
Estimated Ideology of the Supreme Court Justices, 2014
Figure 15.5 Source: Judicial liberalism: Lee Epstein, Jeffrey A. Segal, Harold J. Spaeth, and Thomas G. Walker, The Supreme Court Compendium, 5th ed. (Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 2010), Table 6-4. Justices’ ideology: Martin-Quinn Scores, Jeffrey A. Segal, © Cengage Learning. Photos: Steve Petteway, Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
30
Justices’ Votes by Their Ideology 1953-2013
Figure 15.6 The graph shows that, as justices’ ideology (shown from left to right) against the percentage of times justices voted in a conservative direction line up from the left (most liberal) to the right (most conservative), the percentage of the time they vote conservatively increases substantially. Generally speaking, the most liberal justices, those farthest to the left on the graph (Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburg), vote in the liberal direction (toward the bottom of the graph), whereas the most conservative justices (Scalia and Alito) vote conservatively most of the time (toward the top of the graph. Source: Justices’ ideology: Data updated by Jeffrey Segal from Jeffrey Segal and Albert Cover, “Ideological Values and the Votes of Supreme Court Justices,” American Political Science Review 83 (1989): 557–65. Justices’ votes: Harold J. Spaeth, Lee Epstein, Andrew D. Martin, Jeffrey A. Segal, Theodore J. Ruger, and Sara C. Benesh Supreme Court Database, Version 2014 Release 01. URL: Jeffrey A. Segal, © Cengage Learning. Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
31
Figure 14-4 Political Parties, Presidents, and Women and Minority Judicial Appointees
Reflecting differences in their parties’ coalitions, recent Republican and Democratic presidents have quite different records in terms of the percentage of their judicial appointees who have been women or minority-group members. Note: The figures here are based on appointees of Presidents Carter, Reagan, G. H. W. Bush, Clinton, G. W. Bush, and Obama. Sources: Various sources.
32
Table 14-1 Justices of the Supreme Court*
Year Appointed Nominating President Position before Appointment Anthony Kennedy 1988 Reagan Judge, 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Clarence Thomas 1991 G. H. W. Bush Judge, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1993 Clinton Stephen Breyer 1994 Judge, 1st Circuit Court of Appeals John Roberts Jr. 2005 G. W. Bush Samuel Alito Jr. 2006 Judge, 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Sonia Sotomayor 2009 Obama Judge, 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals Elena Kagan 2010 Solicitor general of the United States * At the time of this book’s publication, there were only eight justices. The vacancy created by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia had not yet been filled.
33
Legal Influences on Judicial Decisions
Constraints on federal courts Court may only rule upon cases presented to it Facts of a case: the relevant circumstances of a legal dispute or offense Three primary sources of the law: U.S. Constitution Legislative statutes Legal precedents (stare decisis) Law is not always a precise guide Judicial leeway “Making” law
34
Table 14-2 Sources of Law that Constrain the Decisions of the Federal Judiciary
U.S. Constitution: The federal courts are bound by the provisions of the U.S. Constitution. The sparseness of its wording, however, requires the Constitution to be applied in the light of present circumstances. Thus, judges are accorded some degree of discretion in their constitutional judgments. Statutory law: The federal courts are constrained by statutes and by administrative regulations derived from the provisions of statutes. Many laws, however, are somewhat vague in their provisions and often have unanticipated applications. As a result, judges have some freedom in deciding cases based on statutes. Precedent: Federal courts tend to follow precedent (or stare decisis), which is a legal principle developed through earlier court decisions. Because times change and not all cases have a clear precedent, judges have some discretion in their evaluation of the way earlier cases apply to a current case.
35
Constitutional Amendments Overturning Supreme Court Decisions
Table 15.2 © Cengage Learning Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
36
Political Influences on Judicial Decisions
Judges’ political beliefs do play a role Often vote in line with their political attitudes Not all issues are clear-cut Expectations of the public, groups, and elected officials also have importance Court cannot move too far from public opinion Interest groups file amicus curiae briefs to make their positions known Congressional legislation may be rewritten Judicial appointments offer the biggest opportunity to influence the courts
37
Judicial Power and Democratic Government
Judicial review: the power to declare a law to be unconstitutional Precedent established in Marbury v. Madison (1803) Court’s judgment is almost always the final word Judiciary’s power has been a source of controversy Unelected judiciary and the principle of majority rule Judiciary at times has acted almost legislatively Addressing broad social issues Making policy
38
Judicial Restraint versus Judicial Activism
Judicial restraint: judges should abide strictly by precedent and legislation Apply the law, never create it Judicial activism: courts should not blindly uphold the decisions of elected officials when core principles are at issue Practiced by both liberal and conservative courts Marbury v. Madison (1803) Citizens United v. FEC (2010)
39
What Is the Judiciary’s Proper Role?
Philosophical debates are inevitable Constitution does not specify the method by which judges should arrive at their decisions Judiciary acts within a governing system based on often-conflicting concepts: Majority rule Minority protections Judiciary was established as a coequal branch to protect individual rights and limit political authority
40
Historical Trends in Supreme Court Rulings
Expansion of National Power under the Marshall Court McCulloch v. Maryland, Gibbons v. Ogden Broadened scope of national power Right to create a bank Regulate economic activities of states Key Question In Marbury, the Court established its power over laws made by Congress. Why, then, did the Marshall Court also expand Congress’s power? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
41
Historical Trends in Supreme Court Rulings
Limits on National Power, 1830s to 1930s Dred Scott v. Sandford Fourteenth Amendment Laissez-faire attitude toward economy Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
42
Historical Trends in Supreme Court Rulings
An 1873 battle over voting rights in Colfax Louisiana left 100 African Americans dead, many of them murdered in cold blood. The Supreme Court reversed federal charges against the private citizen perpetrators, as the 14th Amendment only limits state discrimination. Source: Continents History/Everett Collection Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
43
Historical Trends in Supreme Court Rulings
Strengthened National Power, 1930s to Present Economic regulation FDR’s Court-packing plan Increased protection for civil liberties and civil rights Selective incorporation doctrine Warren court’s interpretation of liberties Key Questions Do you think justices over the age of 70 should be allowed to stay on the Supreme Court? Is appointment for life a good or a bad idea? Is there a right to privacy? Where should the line be drawn against government intrusion in private life? Copyright © 2016 Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
44
Table 15-3 p531
Similar presentations
