Supreme Court
Judiciary – The cornerstone of our
democracy
Judicial Review
• Marbury v. Madison (1803)
– Allows the courts to rule on the constitutionality
of laws, giving the court the power to strike down
or reinforce policy
– Judiciary Act of 1789 and the writ of mandamus
Federal Court System
•
Step 1 – DISTRICT COURTS
– 94 US Dist. – Hear 342,000 cases/yr
– Trial by jury (only federal court with jury)
– Judge David Bunning sits at this level
•
Step 2 – APPEAL (CIRCUIT) COURTS
– 12 Courts of Appeal – Hear 61,000 cases/yr
– Panel of 3 judges, sometimes more
– No cases start here, review district court
decisions
– (MI, OH, KY, TN in the 6th District)
Federal Court System
• Step 3 – US Supreme Court
– 2013 – plenary review with oral arguments in about 100
cases – 5000 petition the court but most are denied
– 80-90 opinions written; 50-60 cases decided without oral
arguments
– Cases audio recorded and released on www.oyez.org
– Hear appeals – writ of certiorari
– Very few “original jurisdiction” cases (they hear it first)
– Rule of 4 – 4 justices needed to agree to hear a case
The Roberts Court
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Types of Opinions
• When an opinion is written (a decision), it
often takes months and many drafts
– Majority Opinion – justices in the majority must
draft an opinion setting out the reasons for their
decision
– Concurring Opinion – justices who agree with the
end result, but not the legal logic, of the majority
can give their opinion
– Dissenting Opinion – justices who disagree with
the opinion write their side – can be one dissent
or multiples depending on legal logic
Implementation
• The court is only as powerful as the president that will enforce
its decisions.
• “John Marshall has rendered his decision; now let him enforce
it!” – Andrew Jackson
• Refused to enforce Cherokee land rights; resulted in the “Trail
of Tears” – his successor Martin Van Buren eventually carried
out the removal
• “All deliberate speed” – Chief Earl Warren
– 10 years after Brown only 1% of Southern schools were
desegregated
– Eisenhower & JFK sent army south to desegregate
• Court must rely on other branches, state & local officials and
law enforcement agencies to enforce its ruling
Public Influence on
Justices
•
•
1.
2.
Justices are NOT elected, appointed by
President
However, not entirely immune to public
opinion
Since they were appointed by a specific
president, they generally agree with his
ideologies.
Justices are aware of public opinion, and are
aware that decisions that flagrantly go against
public opinion will not be implemented or will
be subverted by the legislative or amendment
process
Conservatism vs.
Liberalism???
• Justices are supposed to be “above politics”
and maintain impartiality
• However, they do have personal ideologies
or biases
– EX. – CJ Earl Warren (1953-69) and CJ
Warren Burger (1969-1986) were very liberal
– CJ William Rehnquist (1986-2005) and CJ John
Roberts (2005-?) lean conservative
Appointment
• President appoints judges for ALL federal
court vacancies
• Senate must confirm all nominations by
majority vote (Advice and consent)
• Senatorial courtesy – tradition started by
G.Washington to seek approval from local
senators over locally appointed judges
Types of Jurisprudence
Adversarial system –
• “Blind justice” - decision must be made between
2 choices (defense vs. prosecution – each
presents its side of the case)
• court can’t bring up an issue - court maintains
impartiality and the jury weighs the evidence
• 5th Amendment - defendant doesn’t have to
testify against oneself -we use this system in
the US
Types of Jurisprudence
• Inquisitorial system
• presumed guilty unless you can prove innocence
• court is actively involved in pursuing
facts/investigating the case
• European (Roman/Napoleonic code) model
• judge questions the defendant to try to get them to
admit guilt
• defendant can present their side of the story w/out
being cross-examined; think Amanda Knox case in
Italy – she was found guilty again last week (3rd trial)
• Remember World Civ. “Spanish Inquisition”
Constraints on the
Court
• Justiciable dispute – must judge actual situations,
not hypothetical situations (aka Live Controversy
rule) no “What if we passed a law about ____? Is it
Constitutional?
• Political question – absence of existing law makes it
difficult for the court to rule on a case; won’t hear a
case until a law has been passed regarding the
issue
• Ex. – anti-gay marriage laws in the past 10 years the court to heard those cases in March of 2013.
More on those decisions next week.
Checks on SCOTUS
• President appoints all judges
• Senate must confirm appointed judges
• Congress may alter the structure of the
court system (add or subtract # of courts
and justices)
• Congress has the power to impeach judges
• Congress may amend the Constitution if
the Courts find a law unconstitutional
– Ex. Income tax law originally found
unconstitutionally so Congress added 16th
amendment in 1913
Judicial and Political
Philosophy Intersect
Judicial Activism
Judges should interpret law loosely, using their power to
promote their preferred political and social goals. Judges are
said to be activists when they are likely to interject their own
values in court decision
Equality
Liberal
Freedom
Order
Leans to the left on public policy
and would vote Democrat
Conservative
Leans to the right on public policy
and would vote Republican
Freedom
Judicial Restraint
Legislators, not judges, should make the laws. Judges are said
to exercise judicial restraint when they rule closely to statutes
and previous cases when reaching their decisions. They follow
the “original intent” of the framers.