The Federal Courts
The Court
Yesterday
 The Justices of the Supreme Court of the United
States as of 2006. Top row (left to right): Stephen G.
Breyer, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and
Samuel A. Alito. Bottom row (left to right): Anthony
M. Kennedy, John Paul Stevens, Chief Justice John G.
Roberts, Antonin G. Scalia, and David H. Souter.
The Court
Today
 Front row (L-R): Associate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy,
Associate Justice Elena Kagan, Chief Justice John G.
Roberts, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia, and Associate
Justice Clarence Thomas. Back Row (L-R), Associate
Justice Samuel Alito Jr., Associate Justice Ruth Bader
Ginsburg, Associate Justice Stephen Breyer, and
Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
The Constitution and the Creation
of the Federal Judiciary
 Framers devoted little time to the creation
of the judiciary.
 Believed it posed little of the threat of tyranny
they feared from the other two branches.
 Anti-federalists did see the judiciary as a threat.
 Framers left it to Congress to design the
federal judiciary.
Article III
 Did not settle the question of judicial
review
 Not explicitly stated in the Constitution
 Allows the judiciary to review the
constitutionality of acts of the other
branches of government and the states
 Judicial review settled with Marbury v.
Madison (1803) for national government’s
acts and Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee (1816)
regarding state law
The Judicial Power of the United
States Supreme Court
The following are the types of cases the Supreme Court was given
the jurisdiction to hear as initially specified in the Constitution:
•All cases arising under the Constitution and laws or treaties of the United
States
•All cases of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction
•Cases in which the United States is a party
•Controversies between a state and citizens of another state
•Controversies between two or more states
•Controversies between citizens of different states
•Controversies between citizens of the same states claiming lands under
grants in different states
•Controversies between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states
or citizens thereof
•All cases affecting ambassadors or other public ministers
Article III
 Section I gave Congress the authority to
establish other courts as it saw fit.
 Section II specifies the judicial power of the
Supreme Court and discusses the Court’s
original and appellate jurisdiction.
 Also specifies that all federal crimes, except
those involving impeachment, shall be tried by
jury in the state in which the crime was
committed.
 Section III defines treason, and mandates
that at least two witnesses appear in such
cases.
Article III
 Framers gave federal judges tenure for life “with good
behavior.”
 Did not want judges to be subject to the whims of
politics, the public, or politicians
 Hamilton argued in Federalist 78 that the
“independence of judges” was needed “to guard the
Constitution and the rights of individuals.”
 Some checks on judiciary included:
 Congress has the authority to alter the Court’s
jurisdiction.
 Congress can propose constitutional amendments
that, if ratified, can effectively reverse judicial
decisions.
 Congress can impeach and remove federal judges.
 President (with advise and consent of Senate)
appoints federal judges.
The Judiciary Act of 1789 and the
Creation of the Federal Judicial System
 Established the basic three-tiered structure of the
federal court system
 District courts: at least one in each state, each staffed
by a federal judge.
 Circuit Court: avenue for appeal.
 Each circuit court initially composed of one district court
judge and two itinerant Supreme Court Justices who met
as a circuit court twice a year
 Supreme Court size set in the Act – chief justice and five
associates
 Number of justices set to 9 in 1869.
The Early Court
 First decade, Court not co-equal but it did
assert itself.
 Declined to give President Washington advice on
the legality of some of his actions
 Attempted to establish the Court as an
independent, nonpolitical branch
 Tried to advance principles of nationalism and to
maintain the national government’s supremacy
over the states
 Began to pave the way for announcement of the
doctrine of judicial review
The Marshall Court: Marbury v.
Madison (1803) and Judicial Review
 Marbury v. Madison
 Supreme Court first asserted the power of
judicial review (define) in finding that the
congressional statute extending the Court’s
original jurisdiction was unconstitutional.
 Marshall claimed this sweeping authority for the
Court by asserting that the right of judicial
review was a power that could be implied from
the Constitution’s supremacy clause (define).
 The immediate effect was to deny power to the
Court. The long term effect was to establish the
power of judicial review.
The American Legal System
 Trial courts
 Courts of original jurisdiction where a case begins
 Appellate courts
 Courts that generally review only findings of law
made by lower courts
 Jurisdiction
 Authority vested in a particular court to hear and
decide the issues in any particular case
 Original jurisdiction: The jurisdiction of courts that
hears a case first, usually in a trial. Courts determine
the facts of a case under their original jurisdiction.
 Appellate jurisdiction: The power vested in an
appellate court to review and/or revise the decision
of a lower court.
The American Legal System
 Criminal law
 Codes of behavior related to the protection of
property and individual safety
 Civil law
 Codes of behavior related to business and
contractual relationships between groups and
individuals
The Nature of the Judicial
System
Participants in the Judicial System
 Litigants
Plaintiff - the party bringing the charge
Defendant - the party being charged
Jury - the people (normally 12) who often
decide the outcome of a case
Standing to sue - plaintiffs have a serious
interest in the case.
Justiciable disputes – A case must be
capable of being settled as a matter of law.
Plea Bargains – most common result
The Structure of the Federal
Judicial System
Figure 16.1
The Federal Court System
 Constitutional courts
 Federal courts specifically created by the
U.S. Constitution or Congress pursuant
to its authority in Article III
 Legislative courts
 Courts established by Congress for
specialized purposes, such as the Court
of Military Appeals
The Federal Court System
 District Courts
 94 federal district courts staffed by 646
active judges, assisted by more than 300
retired judges
 No district courts cross state lines.
 Every state has at least one federal
district court.
 The most populous states have four (CA,
TX, and NY). Georgia has three.
Original Jurisdiction of Federal
District Courts
 Involve the federal government as a party
 Present a federal question based on a claim
under the U.S. Constitution, a treaty with
another nation, or a federal statute
 Involve civil suits in which citizens are from
different states, and the amount of money
at issue is more than $75,000
District Courts
 Each federal judicial district has a
U.S. attorney.
 This individual is nominated by the
president and confirmed by the senate.
 The attorney is that district’s chief law
enforcement officer.
 They have a considerable amount of
discretion as to whether they pursue
criminal or civil investigations or file
charges against individuals or
corporations.
The Federal Courts of Appeals
 The losing party in a case heard and decided in a
federal district court can appeal the decision to the
appropriate court of appeals.
 11 numbered circuit courts
 Twelfth, D.C. Court of Appeals
 Handles most appeals involving federal regulatory
commissions and agencies
 Thirteenth, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal
Circuit
 Deals with patents and contract and financial claims
against the federal government
 Have no original jurisdiction
 Try to correct errors of law and procedure that have
occurred in the lower courts or administrative
agencies
 Hear no new testimony.
The Structure of the Federal
Judicial System
 The Federal Judicial Circuits (Figure 16.2)
The Structure of the Federal
Judicial System
The Supreme Court
 9 justices – 1 Chief Justice, 8 Associate
Justices
 Supreme Court decides which cases it will
hear
 Some original jurisdiction, but mostly
appellate jurisdiction.
 Most cases come from the federal courts
 Most cases are civil cases
The Supreme Court
 Decisions of the court of appeals are
binding on only the district courts within
the geographic confines of the circuit.
 Decisions of the Supreme Court are binding
throughout the nation and establish
national precedents.
 Reliance on past decisions or precedents to
formulate decisions in new cases is called “stare
decisis.”
 Allows for continuity and predictability
How Federal Court Judges
Are Selected
 Often a very political process
 Judges nominated by president and
confirmed by Senate
 Can reflect the ideological stamp of the
president – WHY?
 Senatorial Courtesy
 A process by which presidents, when selecting
district court judges, defer to the senator in
whose state the vacancy occurs.
Who Are Federal Judges?
 Typically they have held other
political offices.
 State court judge or prosecutor
 Most have been involved in politics
 White males tend to dominate
Appointments to the U.S.
Supreme Court
 Nomination Criteria
 Competence
 Ideology or Policy Preference
 Strict constructionist: an approach to
constitutional interpretation that
emphasizes the Framer’s original
intentions.
 Who is/ are the strict constructionists on
the Court today?
 Pursuit of Political Support from Various
Groups
 Litmus Test
The Supreme Court Confirmation
Process




Investigation
Lobbying by Interest Groups
Senate Committee Hearings
Senate Vote
The Politics of Judicial Selection
The Supreme Court
 President relies on attorney general and
DOJ to screen candidates.
 1 out of 5 nominees will not make it.
 Presidents with minority party support in
the Senate will have more trouble.
 Chief Justice can be chosen from a sitting
justice, or a new member.
The Backgrounds of Judges and
Justices
Characteristics:
 Generally white males
 Lawyers with judicial and often political
experience
Other Factors:
 Generally of the same party as the
appointing president
 Litmus Test – What is it today?
 Judges and justices may disappoint the
appointing president
The Supreme Court Today:
Deciding to Hear a Case
 9,000 cases were filed at the
Supreme Court in its 2003-2004
term.
 Not always the norm
 1940s fewer than 1000 cases filed
annually
 During the 2003-2004 term, 90 cases
were argued and 73 signed petitions
were issued.
 Modern period, many of the cases have
involved Bill of Rights issues
How Does a Case Survive
the Process?
 Characteristics of the cases the Court
accepts:
 The federal government is the party asking for
review.




 Solicitor General – What does he do?
The case involves conflict among circuit courts.
The case presents a civil rights or civil liberties
question.
The case involves ideological and/or policy
preferences of the justices.
The case has significant social or political
interest, as evidenced by the presence of
interest group amicus curiae briefs.
Supreme Court Today
 Court has two types of jurisdiction
 Original
 Appellate
 Rule of Four
 Court controls its caseload through the certiorari process.
 All petitions for certiorari must meet two criteria:
 The case must come either from a U.S. court of appeals, a
special three-judge district court, or a state court of last
resort.
 Case must involve a federal question. This means that the
case must present questions of interpretation of federal
constitutional law or involve a federal statute, action or
treaty.
 Cert pool
 Discuss list
 Cert granted when at least four justices vote to hear a case
Hearing and Deciding a Case
Oral arguments
The conference and the vote
The opinion
The Courts as Policymakers
 Accepting Cases
 Use the “rule of four” to choose cases. What is
the rule of four?
 Issues a writ of certiorari to call up the case.
 Very few cases are actually accepted each year.
Figure 16.4
The Courts as Policymakers
 Making Decisions
 Oral arguments may be made in a case.
 Justices discuss the case.
 One justice will write the majority opinion
(statement of legal reasoning behind a judicial
decision) on the case.
Figure 16.5
The Courts as Policymakers
 Making Decisions, continued
 Dissenting opinions are written by justices
who oppose the majority.
 Concurring opinions are written in support of
the majority but stress a different legal basis.
 Stare decisis: to let the previous decision
stand unchanged.
 Precedents: How similar past cases were
decided.
 Original Intent: The idea that the Constitution
should be viewed according to the original
intent of the framers.
The Courts as Policymakers
Implementing Court Decisions
 Must rely on others to carry out decisions
 Interpreting population: understand the
decision
 Implementing population: the people who
need to carry out the decision – may be
disagreement
 Consumer population: the people who are
affected (or could be) by the decision
The Courts and the Policy
Agenda
 A Historical Review
 John Marshall (1801-1835) and the Growth of
Judicial Review
Marbury v. Madison
Judicial review: courts determine
constitutionality of acts of Congress
 The “Nine Old Men” – switch in time and the New
Deal
 The Warren Court – Liberal Activist – 1953-1969
 The Burger Court – 1969-1986
 The Rehnquist Court – 1986-2005
 The Roberts Court??? – 2005-
Selected Chief Justices
Can you name them?
Judicial Policy Making and
Implementation
 Policy making:
 More than one hundred federal laws
have been declared unconstitutional.
 Ability to overrule itself
 Judicial Implementation:
 Refers to how and whether judicial
decisions are translated into actual public
policies affecting more than the
immediate parties to a lawsuit.
Understanding the Courts
The Courts and Democracy
 Courts are not very democratic
Not elected
Difficult to remove
 The courts do reflect popular majorities
 Groups are likely to use the courts when
other methods fail – promoting pluralism
 There are still conflicting rulings leading
to deadlock and inconsistency
 Public opinion and the Supreme Court
Understanding the Courts
 What Courts Should Do: The Scope of Judicial
Power
 Judicial restraint: judges should play a minimal
policymaking role - leave the policies to the
legislative branch. Which party supports this? WHY?
 Judicial activism: judges should make bold policy
decisions and even charting new constitutional
ground. Which party/group supports this? WHY?
 Political questions: means of the federal courts to
avoid deciding some cases.
 Statutory construction: the judicial interpretation of
an act of Congress.
Judicial Philosophy and
Decision Making
 Judicial restraint:
 A philosophy of judicial decision making that
argues courts should allow the decisions of other
branches of government to stand, even when
they offend a judge’s own sense of principles.
 Judicial activism:
 A philosophy of judicial decision making that
argues judges should use their power broadly to
further justice, especially in the areas of equality
and personal liberty.
SELECTIVE INCORPORATION
 * Barron v. Baltimore 1833
 * 14th Amendment
 * This is the process of the Supreme
Court adhering the Bill of Rights to
the states through the 14th
Amendment ( Due Process, equal
protection)
The End