1. The Supreme Court of the United States

2. Inside The Supreme Court Building

3. PART1: POWER/JURISDICTION OF THE COURT

4. Article III of the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court as the this co-equal branch of the US government. In its early history the Court was not so prestigious. John Jay retired from the Supreme Court to run for governor of New York. He later declined Adams’ appointment as Chief Justice The framers of the Constitution spent only two days drafting and debating Article III When Pierre L’Enfant designed Washington DC he forgot to plan for the Court building The Supreme Court didn’t have a permanent home until 1935

5. The Scope of Judicial Power Judicial power is passive and reactive Hamilton called it “the least dangerous branch.” Power only to decide judicial disputes A Dual court system –Two court systems, state and federal, exist and operate at the same time in the same geographic areas Judicial Federalism: State & Federal Courts Cases must be ripe Cases cannot be moot Cases cannot be political

6. Chief Justice John Marshall’s 35 year tenure shaped the Court into what it is today, a strong check on power, and protector of liberty. Marshall’s pro-Federalists decisions strengthened both the Court and the national government Marbury v. Madison established the precedent of judicial review

7. Jurisdiction Original jurisdiction: 1) cases involving representatives of foreign governments 2) certain cases between different states Appellate jurisdiction: 1) cases from the 12 US Courts of Appeals and US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2) US Court of Military Appeals 3) cases from district courts regarding acts of Congress 4) Appeals from state high courts on issues of constitutional law. Example?

8. PART 2: THE JUSTICES

9. The Justices The court currently has 8 justices and 1 Chief Justice The number of justices is determined by Congress. Justices are appointed for life or good behavior. They can be impeached for “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” No justice has ever been removed from the bench due to an impeachment trial.

10. The Justices There are no Constitutional requirements to serve as a court justice However, most have been attorneys, and judges. In the 20 th Century most justices have been appointed from the ranks of the lower federal courts. As a group, they represent an elite segment of society. The only minorities (Thrugood Marshall, Clarence Thomas) and the only women (Sandra Day O’Conner, Ruth Bader Ginsberg) have been appointed in the last 50 years.

11. Appointing Justices Justices are nominated by the president and must be approved by the Senate. The Senate Judiciary Committee holds hearings for the nominee Once the committee completes its hearings it issues an report to the full Senate with its recommendations. The full Senate then votes (by simple majority) to confirm or reject the nominee. Senatorial courtesy does not apply to Supreme Court nominees

12. Appointing Justices Politics has become increasingly critical in the president’s selection The president will turn to staff, the attorney general and key members of congress, and a few interest groups to select nominees. The WhiteHouse will vet potential nominees, that is to conduct a thorough background check, including reading everything the nominee has written, and every court decision/opinion with which the nominee is involved The White House will often leak the names of nominees to get public response before a formal announcement.

13. Appointing Justices The American Bar Association’s (ABA) Comm. on the Federal Judiciary ranks federal court nominees professional qualifications Rankings: well qualified, qualified, not qualified. President’s will consult the ABA but are not bound by its opinions Other interest groups may speak out against nominees whose opinions are threatening to their views. Example? Members of the Supreme Court often offer the president suggestions for the bench. O’Conner was recommended by Rehnquist

14. Judge Samuel A. Alito prior to the start of his second day of questioning before the Senate Judiciary Committee The Role of Politics in Selecting Judges  There are no Constitutional requirements  The process of judicial selection is a highly partisan and political process  Because of the power wielded by the Supreme Court, presidents take a personal interest in selecting appointees Judicial Tenure  The Constitution stipulates that federal judges “shall hold their Offices during good Behavior”  Judges cannot be removed for any reason by a President  Congress cannot impeach judges because they don’t like their decisions

15. The Politics of Selecting Judges Previous Backgrounds Number Job ExperienceMost Recent Example 33 Federal Judges Sonia Sotomayor (2009) 22 Practicing LawyersLewis F. Powell (1971) 18 State Court JudgesSandra Day O’Connor (1981) 15 OtherElena Kagan, Solicitor General (2010) 8 Cabinet MembersArthur Goldberg, Labor Sec. (1962) 7 SenatorsHarold H. Burton, R-Oh (1945) 6 Attorney GeneralsTom Clark (1949) 3 GovernorsEarl Warren, D-Ca (1953) 1 President (POTUS)William Howard Taft (1921)

16. The Politics of Appointing Federal Judges Political Litmus Tests Senate: Advice and Consent The Role of Party, Race, Age, and Gender The Role of Ideology and Judicial Experience The Role of Judicial Philosophy and Law Degrees Liberal Conservative Activist Self-Restraint Scalia Thomas Breyer Kennedy Ginsburg Alito Roberts Sotomayor

17. The Process of Judicial Selection Submission of an appointee’s name to the Senate Judiciary Committee Submission of an appointee’s name to the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings are held by the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings are held by the Senate Judiciary Committee Nomination goes to the full Senate, where there is debate and, if no filibuster, a vote Nomination goes to the full Senate, where there is debate and, if no filibuster, a vote Senate Confirmation Filibustering Court Nominees Filibustering Court Nominees Constitution requires only a majority vote of the senate to “advise and consent” to a presidential nominee Constitution requires only a majority vote of the senate to “advise and consent” to a presidential nominee 60 votes required to end a filibuster 60 votes required to end a filibuster

18. The Politics of Appointing Federal Judges Do Judges Make Law? Adherence to Precedent - Stare Decisis The rule of precedent, whereby a rule or law contained in a judicial decision is commonly viewed as binding on judges whenever the same question is presented Judicial Longevity and Presidential Tenure Reform of the Selection Process Changing the Numbers Changing the Jurisdiction

19. Party Affiliation of District Judges and Courts of Appeal Judges Appointed by Presidents President Party Appointees from Same Party RooseveltDemocrat97% TrumanDemocrat92 EisenhowerRepublican95 KennedyDemocrat92 JohnsonDemocrat96 NixonRepublican93 FordRepublican81 CarterDemocrat90 ReaganRepublican94 G.H.W. BushRepublican89 ClintonDemocrat88 G.W. BushRepublican93 First woman appointed to the Supreme Court, by Ronald Reagan

20. Diversity in the Judiciary One of the most significant changes affecting the judiciary in recent decades has been the expansion of opportunity for women and members of minority groups to serve as judges

21. Female and Minority Appointments to Federal Judgeships

22. The Supreme Court Justices Back Row: Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, Samuel A. Alito, Elena Kagan, Front Row: Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, John G. Roberts, Jr., Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg

23. Antonin Scalia Associate Justice Appointed by Ronald Reagan. Took his seat on the High Court on 9/26/86. (longest current serving) Graduate of Georgetown and Harvard Law. Born 3/11/36. RIGHT leaning….

24. Anthony Kennedy Associate Justice Appointed by Ronald Reagan. Took his seat on the High Court on 2/18/88. Graduated from Stanford and Harvard Law. Born 7/23/36. Moderate….

25. Clarence Thomas Associate Justice Appointed by George HW Bush. Took his seat on the High Court on 10/23/91. Graduate of Holy Cross and Yale Law Born 6/23/48. RIGHT leaning….

26. Ruth Bader Ginsburg Associate Justice Appointed by William Clinton. Took her seat on the High Court on 8/10/93. Graduate of Cornell and Columbia Law. Born 3/15/33. LEFT leaning….

27. Stephen Breyer Associate Justice. Appointed by William Clinton. Took his seat on the High Court on 8/3/94 Graduate of Stanford and Harvard Law. Born 8/15/38. LEFT leaning….

28. John Roberts Chief Justice Appointed by George W. Bush. Took his seat on High Court on 9/25/05. Graduate of Harvard and Harvard Law Born 1/27/55 Right leaning….

29. Samuel Alito Associate Justice. Appointed By George W. Bush. Took his seat on the High Court on 1/31/06. Graduate of Princeton and Yale Law. Born 4/1/50. Right leaning….

30. Sona Sotomayor Associate Justice. Appointed by Barack Obama. Took her seat on the High Court on 8/8/2009. Graduate of Princeton and Yale Law. Born 6/25/54 Left leaning….

31. Elena Kagan Associate Justice Appointed by Barack Obama. Took her seat on the High Court on 8/7/10. Graduate of Princeton, Oxford, and Harvard Law School Born 9/17/39. Left leaning….

32. Duties Duties of the court have evolved over the centuries. The primary task is to hear and rule on cases. Three primary decisions made by justices: 1) which cases to hear 2) ruling on cases before the court 3) providing and explanation for ruling (opinion) Ride the circuit The Chief Justice has the added responsibility of presiding over the conference, and serve as administrator of the federal court system Since 1882 clerks have assisted the justices

33. SECTION 3: THE COURT AT WORK

34. Court Basics During a term, the Court sits for two weeks per month During these sittings, the Court hears oral arguments on cases. Arguments are heard on Mondays-Wednesdays Thursday and Friday are reserved for conference. These are meetings held in private chambers in which justices to decide cases After two weeks of hearing cases, Court recesses. During the recess justices write opinions and discuss what cases they will consider in the future The Court hears only 5% of the cases appealed

35. How Cases Reach the Court The main road to the Supreme Court is by a writ of certiorari A “cert” is an order from the Supreme Court to a lower court to send records on a case for review. Certs are granted when attorneys for the case petition the Court on the grounds that the case was mishandled by the lower court or the case involves an important Constitutional question.

36. How Cases Reach the Court 90% of all petitions for Certiorari are rejected Why? The court may feel that the case has no real Constitutional merit They may feel that another case pending will address the issue more effectively They may not want to deal with a hot potato If the Court refuses to take the case, the lower court decisions stands. Stare decisis – “let the decision stand”.

37. How Cases are Selected Cases with merit are placed on a discuss list by justices and their clerks, cases not making the list a remanded to the lower courts Justices and their clerks review petitions for certiorari while in recess. Friday afternoon justices discuss cases on the list, if 4 of the 9 decide to take the case a writ of certiorari will be issued (k.a. the Rule of Four) Lawyers in the case will be notified and send briefs to the Court

38. How Cases are Selected In some cases the justices will decide a case without hearing oral arguments. During the Friday discussion justices can accept a case and issue a per curiam opinion A per curiam (by the court) opinion is a decision made by the court without hearing arguments or receiving new information. Even though a per curiam is unsigned all courts are bound by the decision. Usually involves a case where there was a clear procedural error by the lower court.

39. Steps in Deciding A Case: Step 1: Submitting Briefs Once a case is accepted, lawyers must submit briefs to the Court. A brief is a written statement that outlines the legal arguments, facts of the case, precedents that support their case Amicus curiae briefs may be submitted by parties not directly involved in the case but have an interest in its outcome. Example? Amicus briefs are filed by interest groups, government agencies, or private citizens Amicus briefs are ways of lobbying or influencing the Court

40. Steps in Deciding A Case: Step 2: Oral Arguments After briefs are received the case is placed on the docket Lawyer for each side are given 30 minutes to argue their case. During this time justices are free to interrupt with questions (time is not credited) A light on the podium notifies the attorney when time’s up. Lawyers follow Court protocol, failure to do so often means you can’t come back.

41. Steps in Deciding A Case: Step 3: Conference Friday Conference. Justices debate cases for 6 to 8 hours. No notes of the discussions are kept. The Chief Justice serves as moderator. Justices discuss their opinions on the case in order of seniority. Each case is given about 30 minutes. The discussion on what cases to consider in the future is often less than 5 minutes. Once discussion is closed, justices vote. 6 justices are required for a quorum. If a tie occurs the lower court decision stands

42. Steps in Deciding A Case: Step 4: The Opinion In major cases the Court issues at least one opinion. The opinion states the facts of the case, the Constitutional questions, announces the Courts decisions and offers some explanation. The opinion serves as the precedent for lower courts to follow when deciding similar cases It also serves as a way for the Court to communicate to Congress, the president, and state governments

43. Steps in Deciding A Case: Step 4: The Opinion Four types of opinions: 1) Unanimous- all justices vote the same way 2) Majority 3) Concurring- when one or more justices have other reasons for decision other than those mentioned in the majority 4) Dissenting- opinion of justices on the losing side. May serve as the precedent for cases in the future

44. The Supreme Court & How it Operates Opinions a.Majority b.Dissenting c.Concurring Circulating Drafts Releasing Opinions to the Public After the Court Decides Sometimes remands the case Uncertain effect on individuals who are not immediate parties to the suit Decisions are sometimes ignored Difficult to implement decisions requiring the cooperation of large numbers of officials

45. YearDistrict Court Caseloads Judges Circuit Court Caseload Judges 195091,005 224 2,830 65 196087,421 245 3,899 68 1970 125,423 401 11,662 97 1980 196,757 516 23,200 132 1990 264,409 575 40,898 156 2000 386,200 940 84,800 430 2010 642,500 1,510 171,600 840 2020 1,109,000 2,530 325,100 1,580 Caseload of Federal Courts SOURCE: Committee on Long Range Planning, Judicial Conference of the United States, Proposed Long Range Plan for the Federal Courts (Judicial Conference of the United States, 1995), pp. 14-15

46. The Supreme Court’s Increasing Caseload

47. Caseload in Federal Court

48. How the Court Shapes Policy Three tools: 1) Judicial review- Court’s power to examine the laws and actions of the national, state, and local governments 2) Interpretation of law- Courts authority to refine and clarify the language of the law 3) Overturning previous decisions- Legal system based on the principle of stare decisis. To lend predictability to the law precedents serve as the guide for subsequent decisions

49. Limits on Court Power Types of issues- The Court has little influence in the area of foreign policy. Rules for accepting a case: 1) Court will only consider cases where a decision will make a difference. It will not give advisory opinions (ruling on a law that has not been challenged) 2) Plaintiffs must have suffered some real harm 3) Case must have a substantial federal question 4) Courts typically refuse to hear cases of a political nature

50. Limits on Court Power Limited control on the agenda- Court can only deal with cases within its jurisdiction and when plaintiffs bring a case. As federal laws change so does the Court’s authority. Lack of enforcement power- Court has no mechanism by which to enforce its decisions. Most decisions are obeyed, others… Checks and balances- The president appoints justices, Senate confirms nominees. Congress has the authority to create all federal courts below the Supreme Court as well as determine the number of justices

51. How the Court Shapes Policy Three tools: 1) Judicial review- Court’s power to examine the laws and actions of the national, state, and local governments 2) Interpretation of law- Courts authority to refine and clarify the language of the law 3) Overturning previous decisions- Legal system based on the principle of stare decisis. To lend predictability to the law precedents serve as the guide for subsequent decisions