THE SUPREME COURT
OF THE UNITED STATES
UNIT 17
Preview






History
Sources of law in the USA
State and federal courts
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court
Judicial appointments
Cases
THE COLONIAL PERIOD


Judicial functions: closely intertwined,
often even fused, with legislative and
executive ones
The hightest court: the royal council,
which was also the upper house of the
legislature
CONFEDERAL PERIOD



During the Confederation period: 13
independent state legal systems;
No unifying national judiciary
The Founding Fathers: each state would
maintain its own court system, but national legal
uniformity had to be created
THE CONSTITUTION



The Constitution “shall be the supreme
Law of the Land” (Article VI) providing for
a national judiciary (Article III)
Established the Supreme Court at the top
of the national system and left the
creation of other federal courts to
Congress
State courts – established under state
responsibility
SOURCES OF LAW IN THE U.S.




The Constitution
Common law
Statutes
Treaties
Dual Structure of Courts



State and federal
Jurisdiction often overlaps: a single act
can violate both federal and state law
5th Amendment prohibits double jeopardy
– retrial on the same charge after an
acquittal; trial in both a state and a
federal court has not ben interpreted as
constituting double jeopardy
State courts




Inferior or Petty Trial Courts (minor civil or
criminal matters; JPs)
General Trial Courts (criminal and civil
cases)
State Courts of Appeal
State Supreme court
FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM



District Courts
Courts of Appeals
The Supreme Court
District courts




94 district courts
Trial courts of the federal judiciary
Jurisdiction where a federal law, the
Constitution or treaties apply
Civil and criminal federal cases at first
instance
FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS




Cases on appeal from district courts; no jury, no
witnesses
1) irregularities such as prejudice by the court,
use of illegal evidence, or other violations of
Constitutional rights, 2) constitutionality of a law
Decisions made by a panel of three or more
judges
In most cases, decisions are accepted as final,
thereby ending the case
The Supreme Court’s Threefold
Role



To maintain the supremacy of the
Constitution
To ensure the uniform interpretation of
federal law
To resolve controversies between states or
between a state and the US
THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
UNITED STATES



Apellate jurisdiction: considers only cases
involving new or important legal principles
Original jurisdiction: cases involving
ambassadors, foreign ministers, and
consuls, disputes between states
Judicial review
JUDICIAL REVIEW



The power of the Supreme Court:
1) to determine whether laws are in
harmony with the Constitution and
2) for such laws as are in conflict with the
Constitution, to declare them invalid, void,
and unconstitutional
The American Judiciary




Selected by appointment or election
Federal judges: nomination by the
President, confirmation by the Senate
All federal judges are appointed to serve
during “good behavior” – life-time
appointment
Impeachment – the only means of
removal
Judicial appointments




Franklin Roosevelt: 9
Richard Nixon: 4
Gerald Ford: 1
Ronald Reagan: 3
Articles




Article I: The Legislative Branch
Article II: The Executive Branch
Article III: The Judicial Branch (1. The
Federal Courts: Supreme and Lower
Courts; Tenure and Salary of Judges, 2.
Jurisdiction of the Federal Courts, 3.
Treason)
Article IV: Relations Among the States and
with the Federal Government
Articles



Article V: Proposing and Ratifying
Amendments to the Constitution
Article VI: Miscellaneous Provisions
Article VII: Ratification of the Constitution:
Assent Required of Nine States
Amendments
The Bill of Rights (1791)





I : Freedom of Religion, Speech, Press,
Assembly, and Petition
II : Right to a State Militia and to Bear
Arms
III : Regulations for Quartering of Troops
IV : No Unreasonable Searches and No
Vague Search Warrants
V : Rights of Accused Persons; Protection
of Private Property
Amendments
The Bill of Rights (1791)





VI : Further Rights of Accused Persons
VII : Trial by Jury in Most Civil Cases
VIII : No Excessive Bail or Cruel
Punishment
IX : Unlisted Rights Reserved to the
People
X: Powers Reserved to the States or
People
Fifth Amendment



A person accused of a crime may not be
tried twice for the sam offence: no
double jeopardy
He may not be compelled to be a witness
against himself: no self-incrimination
No person may “be deprived of life,
liberty, or property without due process
of law
Sixth Amendment



Rights of accused persons:
Right to a speedy trial, to impartial jury,
defense councel
To know the charges against him,
confront hostile witnesses, and obtain
friendly witnesses
PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND
LIBERTIES





Rights and liberties – duties:
Freedom of speech: duty to speak honestly and with a
full knowledge of the facts
Freedom of religion: duty to respect the freedom of
others whose religion is different
The right to vote: duty to know the candidates and the
issues in an election
The right to trial by jury: duty to respond willingly when
called for jury service
Major Supreme Court Rulings
Case
Amendment
Effect
Miranda v. Arizona 5th, 6th
(1966)
Confessions not
admissible unless
warnings given
Klopfer v. North
Carolina (1967)
6th
Speedy trial must be
guaranteed in all courts
Benton v.
Maryland (1969)
5th
Prohibition against
double jeopardy
DECLARING FEDERAL LAWS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
Dred Scott vs. Sanford (1857)



Issue: Dred Scott, a negro slave, taken by his
master to the Minnesota region (according to
the 1820 Missouri Compromise a free territory)
Then brought back to Missouri, a slave state.
To create a test case, the abolitionists had Dred
Scott sue for his freedom on the grounds that
his residence in free territory had made him a
free man
Dred Scott vs. Sanford (1857)


Decision: Chief Justice Roger Taney stated that
a Negro slave was not a citizen and could not
bring suit for his freedom in a federal court.
This statement would have sufficed to conclude
the case. Taney, however, wanted to end the
slavery controversy by a judicial pronouncement.
Dred Scott vs. Sanford (1857)




Conclusions:
A) slaves are property
B) Congress may not deprive any person of the
right to take property into federal territories, and
consequently:
C) The Missouri Compromise, a federal law
which prohibited slavery in part of the Louisiana
Territory, was declared unconstitutional
CONSEQUENCES
-The South elated, the North indignant
- Northern newspapers: the decision “is the
Moral Assassination of a Race and Cannot be
Obeyed”
- The decision:
1) blackened Taney’s reputation,
2) did not prevent the Civil War,
3) temporarily weakened but did not destroy the
power and prestige of the Supreme Court.
DECLARING STATE LAWS
UNCONSTITUTIONAL:
Gibbons vs. Ogden (1824)




Issue: Aaron Ogden, operating under a New
York State monopoly grant, ran a ferry on the
Hudson River between New York and New
Jersey.
Thomas Gibbons ran a competing line under a
federal license.
Ogden sued to halt Gibbons; won in the New
York State court
The case - appealed to the Supreme Court
Gibbons v. Ogden (1824)



Decision: New York’s grant of a Hudson River
monopoly to Ogden declared invalid.
The grant violated the Constitution’s delegation
of interstate commerce to federal control.
The decision prepared the way for federal
regulation of railroads, buses, airlines, radio and
television broadcasting, business organizations,
etc. when engaged in interstate commerce

AMENDMENT XIV
Protection of Civil Liberties Against State
Infringment (1868)
Section 1. Definition of Citizenship: Due
Process of Law and Equal Protection of the
Laws. All persons born or naturalized in the
United States and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof, are citizens of the United States and of
the state wherein they reside. No state shall
make or enforce any law which shall abridge the
privileges or immunities of citizens of the United
States, nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of
law, nor deny to any person within its
jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws
REVERSALS
Segregation: Plessy vs. Ferguson
(1896)



The Supreme Court by 8 to 1 held constitutional
a Louisiana law requiring segregation by race of
railroad passengers;
did not violate the “equal protection of the
laws”clause in the 14th Amendment (1868)
provided that facilities were separate but equal
The lone dissenter, Justice John Marshall Harlan:
that the separation of citizens on the basis of
race is inconsistent with equality before the law:
“our Constitution is color-blind, and neither
knows nor tolerates classes among citizens.”
Brown vs. Board of Education of
Topeka (1954)


Mexican-American children – kept in
segregated schools with inferior facilities
Chicano leaders demanded upgrading of
facilities, bilingual teachers: instruction in
Spanish, the teaching of English as a
second language, courses in Chicano
history and culture
Brown vs. Board of Education of
Topeka (1954)



The Supreme Court unanimously held that
racial segregation in public schools
violated the Fourteenth Amendment
Southern state legislatures protested that
the Federal Government has no
Constitutional power over education
States – control education, but must
provide all children with “equal protection
of the law”
Brown vs. Board of Education of
Topeka (1954)

“We conclude that, in the field of public
education, the doctrine of “separate but equal”
has no place. Separate educational facilities are
inherently unequal. Therefore, we hold that the
plaintiffs and others similarly situated for whom
the actions have been brought are, by reason of
the segregation complained of, deprived of the
equal protection of laws guaranteed by the
Fourteenth Amendment. This disposition makes
unnecessary any discussion whether such
segregation also violates the Due Process Clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment”
PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND LIBERTIES
Freedom of Speech and Press:
Feiner vs. New York (1951)



Issue: Irving Feiner, a university student, urged
Negroes to “rise up in arms and fight for their
rights”
Requested by the police to stop, he refused and
was arrested.
F. appealed his conviction for disorderly conduct
as a violation of his freedom of speech
Feiner vs. New York (1951)


By a 6 to 3 decision, the Supreme Court
upheld the conviction
Speaking for the majority, Chief Justice
Fred Vinson declared that Feiner had
attempted “incitement to riot” and created
a “clear danger of public disorder”
Freedom of Religion
Engel vs. Vitale (1962)

Issue: Steven Engel and other parents,
representing various religious views, sued
to stop the New Hyde Park, New York,
school board from requiring their children
to recite a short, nondenominational
prayer. The parents claimed that by the
so-called “Regents’ Prayer”, New York
State was “establishing” a religion
Engel vs. Vitale


Majority opinion: that the “Regents’
Prayer” was a religious activity sponsored
by New York State and that while not a
“total establishment of one particular
religious sect to the exclusion of all
others,” it was a dangerous step in
violation of the First Amendment
The Supreme Court, by 6 to 1, held the
“Regents’ Prayer” unconstitutional
Rights of Accused Persons
Miranda vs. Arizona (1966)




Issue: Self-Incrimination and Right
to Counsel
Ernesto Miranda - picked up by the police
for kidnapping and assaulting a young
woman.
Placed in a police lineup, identified by the
victim and confessed his guilt.
His confession- used in court and helped
to convict him
Miranda vs. Arizona


The case - appealed on the ground that the
police had denied the suspect his Constitutional
protection against self-incrimination
The majority opinion: before questioning, the
police must inform the suspect of his rights to
remain silent and to legal counsel, must provide
counsel, and must warn the suspect that his
remarks may be used against him
CONCLUSION:
JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION



The Supreme Court – a major role in
assuring flexibility in the Constitution by
A) judicial review of federal and state laws
B) the Supreme Court has proved willing
to reverse itself with its newer decisions in
many cases reflecting more modern
interpretations of the vague terminology in
the Constitution
Legal terms

On the merits refers to a legal decision
based on the facts in evidence and the law
pertaining to those facts, because the
judge considers technical and procedural
defenses to be overcome or irrelevant.
Legal terms






A party to a lawsuit
Litigant
A case before a court
lawsuit
The power of a court to hear and decide a
case
jurisdiction
Legal terms




The hearing of a civil or criminal case
before a court of competent jurisdiction
Trial
An application for judicial examination by
a higher tribunal of the decision of any
lower tribunal
appeal
Put the verbs into the appriopriate
forms:

All federal judges___(appoint, passive), as
___(spell out) in the Constitution, to serve
during “good behaviour”. This is effectively lifetime appointment because impeachment
___(be) the only means of removal. Eleven
federal judges ___(impeach, passive), and eight
others (resign) in the face of imminent
impeachment; of the thousands who ___(hold)
office since 1789 only 4 ___(remove, passive)
following impeachment.
Put the verbs into the appropriate
forms

In addition, the Constitution ___(provide)
that their salaries may not ____(reduce,
passive) while they serve. Thus, although
the judges ____(choose, passive) by a
political process – nomination by the
president and confirmation by the Senate
– they ___ relatively ____(isolate,
passive) from political pressures once on
the bench.
Key

All federal judges are appointed, as spelled
out in the Constitution, to serve during “good
behaviour”. This is effectively life-time
appointment because impeachment is the only
means of removal. Eleven fedral judges have
been impeached, and eight others resigned
in the face of imminent impeachment; of the
thousands who have held office since 1789
only 4 have been removed following
impeachment.
Key

In addition, the Constitution provides
that their salaries may not be reduced
while they serve. Thus, although the
judges are chosen by a political process
– nomination by the president and
confirmation by the Senate – they are
relatively isolated from political pressures
once on the bench.
Fill in the missing words: appellate,
hear, original, suits, tried

The United States Supreme Court is
primarily the chief ____ court though it
has ____jurisdiction (i.e., authority to
____ cases not yet ___elsewhere) as well.
Most original ____ involve a state suing
another state, which the Court must hear.
Key:

The United States Supreme Court is
primariy the chief appellate court though
it has original jurisdiction (i.e., authority
to hear cases not yet tried elsewhere) as
well. Most original suits involve a state
suing another state, which the Court must
hear.
ambassadors, citizens, decided,
diplomatic, Suits

___ by a state against the United States,
suits by one state against aliens or ___ of
another state, and those involving ___and
other ___personnel may also originate
here. Since the founding of the Supreme
Court, only about one hundred original
suits have been___.
Key

Suits by a state against the United States,
suits by one state against aliens or
citizens of another state, and those
involving ambassadors and other
diplomatic personnel may also originate
here. Since the founding of the Supreme
Court, only about one hundred original
suits have been decided.
appeals, discretion, federal
Litigants, reviewing

Most of the Court’s work involves ___,
state and local cases or resolving___ from
federal decisions. ___ from either state or
___courts may request the Court to
review any case, and the Court has ___ to
grant or refuse request.
Key

Most of the Court’s work involves
reviewing state and local cases or
resolving appeals from federal decitions.
Litigants from either state or federal
courts may request the Court to review
any case, and the Court has discretion to
grant or refuse request.