Justin Tolentino
Mr. Maher & Mr. Irwin
AP Government A2
20 April 2012
Definition – The War Powers Act is a federal law, adopted by a joint resolution
through congress, that checks the military might/power of a president through
the following provisions.
• Armed forces may only be utilized in warlike situations with the approval of
Congress.
• The president must notify Congress of utilizing forces for military purposes
within 48 hours.
• Troops may not occupy an area for more than 60 days without an actual
declaration of war. (This includes a mandatory 30-day withdrawal period.)
• However, it should be noted that the president may distribute troops as he
pleases, however without the funding or military action of a war.
Application – It has been noted that many presidents have considered this law
unconstitutional, perhaps implying that if it were not for this act we may have
been involved in many more war/combat situations.
Example – In 2011 the US military presence in Libya exceeded 60 days and
incumbent Obama had yet not conferred with Congress, however he stated it
wasn’t necessary as the US transferred power to NATO.
Original Jurisdiction –
• Ability of trial courts (lower courts) to hear and decide on specific cases
that fall under their responsibility.
Appellate Jurisdiction –
• The ability of appellate courts (higher courts) to review the decisions of
lower courts.
*It should be noted that in special cases the Supreme Court can hold original
jurisdiction .
Application – Basically, lower courts have the ability to implement their own
decisions, however, appellate courts have the ability to implement/reconstruct
a decision/ruling.
Example – In Marbury v. Madison, Marbury had his case thrown out as he
approached the Supreme Court first although the specifics of the case did not
allow the Supreme Court to hold original jurisdiction over the case.
Definition - exists where two or more courts from different systems simultaneously
have jurisdiction over a specific case.
Application – The United States Constitution provides for federal courts (such as
the Supreme Court) to also have the ability to hear cases that can also be heard
by state courts.
Example – Jurisdiction may be concurrent between federal and state levels if a
crime defined by state law is broken federal property.
Definition – An unwritten custom that runs along the guidelines that a
presidential appointment of a state-level, government position first be silently
affirmed by the Senator[s] of the President’s party of said state.
Application – Such positions wherein this practice may be implemented are
federal district court judges, U.S. attorneys, as well as federal marshals.
Example – Mr. X has been nominated by the president to be federal district
judge of California. The incumbent president is a democrat, and both senators
from this state are democrats, however they both ‘veto’ the appointment due
to the fact that they disagree with it for various reasons. The president now
searches for a replacement.
Definition – The Rule of Four is a term that is applied to the Supreme Court of the
United States. This practice run’s concurrently with another term, the Writ of
Certiorari. The Writ of Certiorari is a legal term in which documents necessary to
properly hear a case are ascended form a lower court. The Rule of Four applies
to this as a Writ of Certiorari only needs a vote of four, less than the majority as
the court holds nine justices.
Application – All Supreme Court cases must start with a Writ of Certiorari, which in
turn falls under the provisions and rules of the Rule of Four.
Example – Filing as a pauper, Ernesto Miranda filed a Writ of Certiorari in 1965. A
Writ that fell under the provisions of the Rule of Four, was voted upon under such,
and the famous case of Miranda v. Arizona commenced.