The Judicial Branch Article III of the United States Constitution

The Judicial Branch

Article III

of the United States Constitution

I. Purpose of Courts

A. Resolve legal disputes by applying the law to indv situations

1. Criminal law: the people vs an indv

2. Civil law: an indv vs an indv

***Please note that a legal indv does NOT have to be a human being. A legal indv can be an indv, a business, a corp, a govt agency.***

JUDICIAL BRANCHJUDICIAL BRANCHARTICLE IIIARTICLE III

The Judicial Branch interprets or The Judicial Branch interprets or explains the meaning of laws.explains the meaning of laws.

Judicial Branch protects your rights!Judicial Branch protects your rights! There are different levels of courts There are different levels of courts

which handle different cases.which handle different cases. Federal courts handle cases about Federal courts handle cases about

the Constitution and laws made by the Constitution and laws made by Congress.Congress.

How is the Judicial Branch How is the Judicial Branch Organized?Organized?

The Supreme Court is the highest court in The Supreme Court is the highest court in the Judicial Branch.the Judicial Branch.

The Supreme Court has 9 justices (judges)The Supreme Court has 9 justices (judges) The head of the Supreme Court is called The head of the Supreme Court is called

the Chief Justice.the Chief Justice. Justices are not elected! The President Justices are not elected! The President

appoints Justices.appoints Justices. The Senate must approve a Justice The Senate must approve a Justice

appointment.appointment.

OUR SUPREME COURTOUR SUPREME COURT

Term of OfficeTerm of Office

Justices serve for a life term.Justices serve for a life term. They may resign or retire. They are They may resign or retire. They are

in life until death otherwise.in life until death otherwise. Just like the President, Justices may Just like the President, Justices may

be impeached, tried, and removed be impeached, tried, and removed from office if found guilty.from office if found guilty.

JUDICIAL REVIEWJUDICIAL REVIEW Judicial review Judicial review is one of the most is one of the most

important powers of the Judicial Branch. important powers of the Judicial Branch. It is the power of the courts to say that It is the power of the courts to say that the Constitution does not allow the the Constitution does not allow the gov’t to do something. gov’t to do something.

The Supreme Court may rule that a law The Supreme Court may rule that a law made by Congress is made by Congress is unconstitutionalunconstitutional!!

Jurisdiction-area of power/control of the Jurisdiction-area of power/control of the federal courts as described by the federal courts as described by the Constitution.Constitution.

FEDERAL COURTSFEDERAL COURTS

1. Supreme Court-U.S. Supreme Court1. Supreme Court-U.S. Supreme Court 2. Appellate Courts-12 Regional Circuit 2. Appellate Courts-12 Regional Circuit

Courts of Appeals and 1 U.S. Court of Courts of Appeals and 1 U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitAppeals for the Federal Circuit

3. Trial Courts-94 Judicial District 3. Trial Courts-94 Judicial District Courts and 3 other specialized courtsCourts and 3 other specialized courts

4. Other special courts for military, 4. Other special courts for military, veterans, taxes, etc.veterans, taxes, etc.

THE APPEALS PROCESSTHE APPEALS PROCESS

1. Begins at the district court1. Begins at the district court 2. Then proceeds on to the Court of 2. Then proceeds on to the Court of

AppealsAppeals 3. Case could proceed on from their 3. Case could proceed on from their

to the Supreme Court—the highest to the Supreme Court—the highest court in our country!court in our country!

B. Major players

1. Criminal lawa. Prosecutor—represents the people

b. Defendant—indv accused of breaking law

2. Civil lawa. Plaintiff—indv who was wronged

b. Defendant—indv accused of wrongdoing

3. Judgea. Applies the law

b. Instructs the juryc. Keeps proceedings fair and

neutral d. May decide case if no jury

4. Jurya. Decides facts of case

b. Determines innocence or guilt

C. Precedent

A ruling that sets guidelines for future similar cases

D. Jurisdiction

1. Define: a court’s right to hear a case

2. Original jurisdiction (aka: trial court)a. First time a case is heardb. Establishes facts of

case/determines innocence or guilt

3. Appellate jurisdictiona. Higher court that reviews trial court

decisions b. Does NOT retry the case; only determines if 1. Original proceedings were fair 2. Law was correctly applied

E. State courts

1. Deal with state laws

2. Three levels a. Trial courts b. Appellate courts (aka courts of appeal) c. State supreme court (aka court of final appeal)

3. Cases may be appealed to the USSC if a federal or constitutional issue is involved

F. Federal Courts

1. Original jurisdiction over federal issues a. Federal laws

b. Constitutional issuesc. Resident of one state v

resident of another state d. Treaties

e. Maritime issues f. Foreign govt is involved g. US govt is involved

2. Three levelsa. Trial court (aka District Court)

b. Appellate court (aka Court of Appeals) c. Supreme Court (aka Court of Final Appeal)

II. The Federal Court System

A. The Judiciary Act of 1789Established the federal court system

by dividing the country into federal judicial districts, creating district courts and courts of appeals

B. District Courts

1. 94 across the country and US territories a. 89 throughout the states according to population distribution b. 1 each in

1. D.C.2.

Puerto Rico 3. Guam 4. US Virgin Islands 5. Mariana Islands

2. Original jurisdiction over federal cases

3. Territory District Courts also have original jurisdiction over local cases

C. Courts of Appeals (aka Circuit Courts)

1. 13 across country

a. 12 hear appeals from district courts

b. 1 hears appeals from

1. Special courts like claims court, tax court, etc

2. Federal agencies like Office of Patents and Trademarks, Civil Service Commission, etc

D. Federal Judges

1. Appointed by presidenta. Advisors recommend

candidates b. Professional background

c. Political/social viewsd. Collegiate career

2. Confirmed by Senatea. Judiciary cmte holds

hearings b. Professional background c. Political/social views d. Simple majority vote

3. Life terms

a. Death b. Resignation/retirement c. Impeachment

4. Balance rights of indv vs common good

III. United States Supreme Court A. Judicial Review

1. Define: Power to overturn any Act of Congress or executive action the Court deems unconstitutional

2. Is it in the Constitution? Not specifically

stated; however, the Constitution says the Court shall

“interpret the law”

3. Established by Marbury v Madison (1803)

a. Facts of the case: Marbury appointed to federal

judgeship by outgoing Pres John Adams.

New Pres TJ tells Sec State Madison NOT to deliver letter of appointment (Marbury can’t take his new job)

Marbury sued in USSC citing right to do so in Fed Jud Act of 1789

b. Justices considered both facts of case and law in question

c. USSC issued opinion:

Marbury was legally appointed as fed judge and Sec State Madison should deliver letter BUT the part of the Fed Jud Act of 1789 that said the USSC would hear this type of case is unconstitutional.

The Constitution lists specific type cases the USSC has original jurisdiction over. This was not one of them.

SO, because that part of law was unconstitutional, Marbury shouldn’t have sued in USSC and USSC doesn’t have authority to make Madison deliver the letter.

d. Precedent set: THE CONSTITUTION IS WHAT THE SUPREME COURT SAYS IT IS

First time Court interpreted the Constitution to the extent of declaring part of a law unconstitutional.

This put the Jud Branch on equal footing with Leg and Exec branches because the Court has the power to declare acts of the others unconstitutional.

***The US STILL has arguments over this issue!! Many people recognize this as constitutional, but many others say the Constitution is black and white and NOT subject to anyone’s interpretation—including the USSC

B. Justices

1. Appointed by presidenta. Advisors recommend

candidates b. Professional background

c. Political/social viewsd. Collegiate career

2. Confirmed by Senatea. Judiciary com. holds

hearings b. Professional background c. Political/social views d. Simple majority vote

3. Life terms

a. Death b. Resignation/retirement c. Impeachment

4. Why it matters!!

Conservative presidents = conservative justices

Liberal presidents = liberal justices

Justices serve for years

Justices interpret the Constitution; set precedent

Those precedents affect all Americans

C. A day in the life . . .

1. Calendara. Term: first Monday in October – end

of June b. Sittings: 2-wk sessions when Justices hear cases then retire to decide opinions

2. Selecting casesa. Original jurisdiction cases—must

hear these 1. State govt v state govt 2. Foreign rep a party in a case

b. Appellate jurisdiction cases—choose to hear

1. Must deal with federal or constitutional issue

2. Must impact a majority of citizens

“Rule of Four”—four of the nine justices must agree to hear the indv case out of the 1000s of cases appealed to them.

3. Case is on the docket (aka a court’s schedule or calendar)

a. Briefs are submitted—written summary of each lawyer’s side of the case

b. Justices study lower court proceedings and briefs

c. Oral arguments1. Each side gets 30 mins

to argue 2. Justices get to ask questions

4. Deliberations

a. CJ summarizes case and main points b. Group discussion, each presents views c. Justices vote—simple majority “wins”

5. Opinions issued a. Define: written statement explaining ruling and reasons for reaching that decision b. Majority opinion: “winning” decision, sets precedent

c. Concurring opinion: agree with majority opinion but for different reasons d. Dissenting opinion (aka minority opinion):

disagree with majority opinion

D. Factors influencing the Court

1. Constitution—fundamental law of US 2. Precedent—are there past similar cases 3. Intent—of the Constitution and law(s) in question 4. Social values—what is the current view of most Americans (will of the people) 5. Personal judicial philosophy—to what extent should justices become involved in setting policy

JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY: An ongoing “discussion” in American politics about the extent to which justices/judges should involve themselves with setting policy. Judges don’t make laws so how does a judge set policy?

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: the Jud branch is an equal partner with the Leg and Exec and should be actively involved in interpreting and applying laws. Strong belief in judicial review.

JUDICIAL RESTRAINT: the Jud branch should let the Leg and Exec branches set policy and only get involved if that policy is a flagrant violation of Constitution. Not a strong belief in judicial review.

*NEITHER VIEW IS LIBERAL OR CONSERVATIVE*

E. Checks on the Court

1. Executive: pres appoints conservative or liberal justices/judges depending on his beliefs

2. Legislative: Senate confirms appointees based on its majority’s beliefs

3. Amendment process: a. How is this a check? USSC makes

decision people REALLY don’t like. People persuade Congress to propose a constitutional amendment. If ratified by the states, it nullifies the USSC decision.

b. Examples

1. Dred Scott (1857) decision: Slave was property and not free just because he had lived in a free state. As property, and not a US citizen, he had no right to sue in federal court.

14th Amendment (1868) : Declared former slaves to be US citizens with all rights of citizenship.

This amendment nullified the Dred Scott decision.

Abortion????

Flag burning????

Gay marriage????

Stem cell research????

*****PLEASE NOTE*****

The president CANNOT propose a constitutional amendment. WHY??