UNIT 3: JUDICIAL BRANCH Chapter 8: The Federal Courts and the Judicial Branch Chapter 13: Supreme Court Cases Judicial Branch: The American Court System A dual court system State courts: Hear the majority of cases; deal with state laws and state constitutions Federal Deal courts with the constitution and federal laws The American Court System, cont’d… Jurisdiction Authority to hear and decide a case Exclusive Jurisdiction: Federal courts have the sole right to hear a case Concurrent Jurisdiction: Cases fall under both state and federal purview Involves residents of different states and amount of money involved exceeds $75,000 Plaintiff: Person making the legal complaint Defendant: Person against whom the complaint is filed Structure of the Federal Court System Founding Fathers did not provide great detail for our courts in Article III Judiciary Act of 1789: Detailed the SCOTUS, three tiered system District Courts: Trial courts for the federal system, original jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases heard in the federal system; 94 in US Courts of Appeals: Above the district courts; appellate courts; 12 in US Supreme Court: Top tier, “Court of last resort,” 100 cases heard per year (from 8,000 petitions) Federal Judges Constitution gives the president power to nominate all federal judges Approval by Senate Factors to consider: Legal expertise Party affiliation Judicial Philosophy (Judicial restraint v. judicial activism) Opinions of Senate Judicial Restraint v. Judicial Activism Judicial Restraint: Concept that a judge should interpret the Constitution according to the Framers’ original intention; narrow, limited decisions Judicial Activism: Judges can adapt the meaning of the Constitution to meet the demands of contemporary realities; broad, sweeping decisions Precedent: Previous court rulings Stare Decisis “Let the decision stand” Often times the SCOTUS makes rulings based on precedent, or how the court had previously ruled in similar cases Once their decision is made, that is the end of it! Checks and Balances Judicial Review Established in Marbury v. Madison (1803) Appointment process Framers thought making judgeships permanent would help ensure judicial independence Amendment process District Courts United States District Courts Trial courts-94 in the United States Most cases are heard by a judge without a jury Handles about 300,000 cases/year District Courts Civil cases that deal mostly with bankruptcy, property damage, contract disputes, civil rights, postal laws, etc. Criminal cases that deal with forgery, counterfeiting, fraud, narcotics, interstate automobile theft District Courts Grand Juries Judges preside over trial process Magistrate Judges: Responsible for overseeing some of the early hearings of a criminal trial when routine matters are carried out May also hear misdemeanor trials US District Attorney : Represent the US Government in federal court Public Defenders US Marshals Federal Courts of Appeals 13 total (12 throughout the 50 states and 1 in DC) Hear cases on appeal; 65,000 per year; mostly criminal and civil cases Appellant: Has to show the original ruling was based on a legal mistake No jury trials, cases ruled on by a panel of judges, no witnesses or evidence Federal Courts of Appeals Power to review all final decisions of the federal district courts Determines whether a federal law has been correctly applied by the district courts Federal Circuit: Has nationwide appellate jurisdiction for cases involving certain areas of law (international trade, government contracts, patents, etc.) Other Federal Courts US Court of International Trade US Tax Court US Court of Appeals for Veterans US Court of Federal Claims US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces (Courts martial) National Security Courts Military Commissions Washington, D.C. and Territorial Courts Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) Started out nearly powerless, evolved over time Chief Justice John Marshall from 1801-1835 Believed in expansive power of the Supreme Court Oversaw Marbury v. Madison (Judicial review) McCulloch v. Maryland (National supremacy; Necessary and Proper Clause) Gibbons v. Ogden (Fed. Gov’t would regulate interstate commerce) Other Important SCOTUS Decisions Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Civil Rights Cases (1883) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Lochner v. New York (1905) Brown v. Board of Education (1954) Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Bush v. Gore (2000) Choosing Supreme Court Justices Presidents use same criteria as federal judge selections No formal job requirements for Justices Most have background in law and have been judges in lower courts Share judicial philosophy/political affiliation Assess level of Senate support Confirmation hearings: Senate Judiciary Committee Their vote guides the full Senate vote SCOTUS Procedures Term begins first Monday in October through June or July Two week blocks First block-listen to lawyers present their cases Second block-work behind closed doors to make rulings, determine what cases to hear, and issue orders Dozens of clerks help with this procedure Selecting Cases Typically only hears a handful of cases where they hold original jurisdiction Most cases come from an appeal Asks the SCOTUS to issue a writ of certiorari An order seeking review of the lower court case Some come through highest state courts 100 total cases are placed on the court’s docket for the year Rule of Four: Majority is not needed to hear a case “Hearing” a Case Read briefs Consider “amicus” briefs Oral arguments 30 minutes to present the case to the Justices Questioning Opinions Justices meet privately to discuss the case Conducts own research/ study Produce opinions: Majority Opinion: At least five justices agree Concurring Opinion: A justice may agree with conclusion but for different legal reasoning Dissenting Opinion: A justice disagrees with the majority decision, can influence future judgments Court Orders SCOTUS can issue 50-60 brief, unsigned court orders Have a lower court reconsider a case in light of one of SCOTUS’ decisions Reviewing the Courts 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Explain the dual court system Explain the difference between concurrent and exclusive jurisdiction Identify three things the President must consider when naming a federal judge Explain the difference between judicial restraint and judicial activism Define Stare Decisis Identify three “special courts” on the federal level Name 10 candy bars CIVIL LIBERTIES AND CIVIL RIGHTS Ch. 10: Civil Liberties Ch. 11: Civil Rights www.arizonacrc.org Why does it matter? Civil liberties are fundamental safeguards that protect us from govt actions Govt may not restrict freedoms, liberties w/o good reason Bill of Rights Ex: freedom of speech, religion, personal security The Bill of Rights First proposed by George Mason, but states already had own protected liberties Americans didn’t trust govt after British rule ballinyourcourt.wordpress.com Supporters of Constitution agreed to add a Bill of Rights Civil Liberties v. Civil Rights Civil liberties: basic freedoms all people have that are protected against govt abuse Ex: religious freedom, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures Civil rights: Rights of fair and equal status and treatment Right to participate in govt Ex: right to petition govt www.blackpast.org www.isocindiachennai.org Limits on Civil Liberties, Rights Sometimes liberties and rights conflict Smoking in a public place Courts balance rights with protecting the common good www.carnageandculture.blogspot.com www.cnn.com th 14 Amendment Bill of Rights intended to limit federal govt Forbade states from passing laws that would “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law” Supreme Court has incorporated much of the Bill of Rights into the 14th Amendment “selective incorporation” States cannot enact laws that deny citizens protections by the Bill of Rights Gitlow v. New York (1925) Religious Freedom Two freedoms in U.S.: Govt forbidden from establishing an official religion People have right to “free exercise” of own religion ourobamanation.wordpress.com Establishment Clause “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion” Govt cannot take actions creating official religion Govt cannot support one religion over another Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971): law must meet all three to be found constitutional: 1. 2. 3. Have secular (non-religious) purpose Neither advance nor inhibit religion Not encourage “excessive” govt entanglement with religion Establishment Clause Engel v. Vitale (1962) Wallace v. Jaffree (1985) www.wrensworld.com Free Exercise Religious practices can be limited Reynolds v. U.S. (1878): polygamy West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette (1943) Employment Division of Oregon v. Smith (1990) Church of Lukumi Babalu Aye v the City of Hialeah Freedom of Speech, Press If U.S. citizens are to fully participate in democracy, they must have access to full range of opinions and information Protecting rights often difficult, especially unpopular ideas nypeoplespress.blogspot.com Freedom of Speech, Press Limitations: obscenity, false advertising, defamation, etc. Slander: spoken defamatory comments Libel: written defamatory statements Must be false and show “actual malice” New York Times Co. v. Sullivan (1964): public figures have fewer legal protections Freedom of Speech, Press Schenck v. U.S. (1919): “clear and present danger” Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969): “imminent lawlessness” Photo of a 1914 anarchist rally in New York's Union Square. www.pbs.org Freedom of Speech, Press Prior restraint: govt action seeks to prevent materials from being published Near v. Minnesota (1931) New York Times Co. v. Nixon (1971) Symbolic speech: communication of ideas through symbols, actions Tinker v. Des Moines (1969) Texas v. Johnson (1989) Freedom of Assembly, Petition Govt cannot deny people right to “peaceably assemble and to petition the Govt for a redress of grievances” Edwards v. South Carolina (1963) Govts can restrict time, manner, place Freedom of association: NAACP v. Alabama (1958) xtimeline.com Protecting Individual Liberties Right to keep and bear arms: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” Which emphasis? Individual right? Right to form state militias? McDonald v. Chicago (2010) washingtonushistory.blog spot.com www.dailykos.com scottthong.wordpress.com Protecting Individual Liberties Fourth Amendment: forbids “unreasonable searches and seizures” Must be probable cause (reasonable belief a crime has been committed) Otherwise, exclusionary rule in effect (evidence seized illegally cannot be used in court) Mapp v. Ohio (1961) Today: PATRIOT Act weakens civil liberty protections, some parts struck down (2007) New Jersey v. TLO (1985): students Protecting Individual Liberties Right to privacy: not in Constitution, but . . . Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) Roe v. Wade (1973) Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) Due process of law Procedural: concerns fairness of procedures Substantive: concerns fairness of laws Rights of the Accused: SelfIncrimination Person cannot be forced to provide evidence against self Miranda v. Arizona (1966) Warnings must be read before questioning Right to remain silent Right to an attorney www.pbs.org Rights of the Accused: Fair Trial Sheppard v. Maxwell (1966) Press coverage and jury selection Trial by jury: may be waived by defendant Gideon v. Wainwright (1963): right to attorney Attorneys’ failures to meet professional standards may violate rights courses.ttu.edu Rights of Criminals: Punishment “cruel and unusual” punishment illegal Wilkerson v. Utah (1879): banned torture Capital punishment Furman v. Georgia (1972): found application of death penalty to be arbitrary Gregg v. Georgia (1976): found Georgia’s system constitutional w/ addition of high court review, separate processes of sentencing www.biography.com Civil Rights in the U.S. Civil rights: rights involving equal status and treatment and right to participate in govt Changed over time b/c definition of fairness and equal treatment has changed Story of U.S.: participation in govt has expanded since founding Equal Justice Under Law Equal protection clause (EPC – 14th Amendment): requires states to apply law same way for one person that they would for another person in same circumstances All people not treated same in all respects: reasonable distinction Ex: 7 year olds cannot vote Equal Protection of the Law Rational basis test: sometimes legitimate goal of govt allows for reasonable, different treatment Ex: Intermediate scrutiny test: higher standard to determine if laws violate EPC driving age in different states Sexual discrimination Strict scrutiny test: highest standard 1. fundamental right is restricted 2. suspect classification: one based on race or nat’l origin pittqueertheoryf11.wordpress.com Rolling Back Segregation Plessy allowed de jure (by law) segregation Legal challenges, lead by NAACP: Gaines v. Canada (1938): SC declared equal protection required states to offer equal facilities Sweatt v. Painter (1950): SC declared facilities separate, but not equal; had to admit Sweatt Brown v. Board (1954): SC declared segregation “generates a feeling of inferiority” and illegal Ordered schools desegregated; much resistance De facto (by fact) segregation still occurs Affirmative Action Policy that requires employers, institutions to provide opportunities for people of certain historically underrepresented groups Pro: addressing past wrongs Con: reverse discrimination (again majority) Regents of Univ. of California v. Bakke (1978): Can take race into account, but not through quota system Gratz v. Bollinger (2003): Can take race into account, but not through automatic points theurbanpolitico.com Conservativecartoon.com