Chapter 3Federal Courts

In three cases in the Bush presidency, the SC ruled against him and the GOP Congress in their attempt to prosecute the War on Terror as they saw fit.

I. Principles of Court OrganizationA. Jurisdiction1. Geographical Jurisdiction (e.g., extradition)2. Subject Matter Jurisdiction – some courts can hear a limited

category of cases3. Hierarchical Jurisdiction (original and appellate)B. Dual Court system – Federal and State (51 court systems;

Fig. 3.1)C. Trial and Appellate Courts 1. Trial Courts: trial centers on determining facts (evidence,

witnesses, juries)2. Appellate Courts: centers on correctly interpreting the law

(none of the above)

II. History of the Federal CourtsA. 2 landmarks shaped the current court1. Article III (Constitution)• Disagreement between Federalists (distrusted state court

ability to produce uniform body of law; wanted a series of lower federal courts) and Anti-Federalists (feared too powerful national government; wanted federal law to first be interpreted by state courts; p. 60)

• Article III, however, basically passed the buck to Congress (p. 61).

2. Judiciary Act of 1789• Plan: SC (5 justices, 1 chief), circuit courts in every district

(composed of 2 SC justices who “rode” circuit), and 1 district court judge (Fig. 3-2).

• Major victory of Federalists (got federal lower courts).

• But did support state interests as well:– dc boundaries shaped by states (no district encompassed

more than one state)– Selection of dc judges tied to respective states– Gave lower district courts limited jurisdiction.

B. 1789-1891 – growing consensus that the system was inadequate

1. Circuit riding (Fig 3-2): one justice had to travel 10,000 miles in one year. One murdered by unhappy party on the road.

2. Caseloads – sometimes took 3 years before cases were heard (1800 cases at SC in 1890)

C. Court of Appeals Act 18911. Reformers differ: states rights people wanted to

return cases to states (reduce fed. Jurisdiction). Nationalists wanted to create/expand/reform circuit courts.

2. Another victory for nationalists. Created 9 new “Courts of Appeal” which handles almost all appeals of dc’s.

3. Basically has remained the same ever since.

III. U.S. District Courts

A. Characteristics

1. Geography – one in each state; never crosses state lines (Fig 3-3).

Map of Circuit and District Courts

2. 678 dc judgeships; 94 dc’s; each court ranges from 2-28 (pop based).

3. Full staffs

4. Each has one U.S. Atty (nominated by Pres. And confirmed by Senate).

B. 3-Judge district court panels in certain cases but norm is 1 judge per case – Congress became frustrated with laissez-faire dc justices in early 1900s. Legislated that certain cases must be heard by 3 dc justices instead of one.

1. Panel is composed of original dc judge, a circuit court judge, and another dc judge (latter 2 chosen by Circuit Chief).

2. The use of these, however, has decreased after mid-century (320 in 1973 to 13 in 2007).

C. Other federal courts1. Magistrates (early stages of criminal cases; Soc Sec claims,

etc.)2. Bankruptcy Judges D. Caseload of dc’s1. 2007, 325k cases filed.2. What cases? • Federal Questions (usually a congressional

statute). Money cases must exceed $75,000. • Diversity Jurisdiction – citizens of different states suing.

Why? Bias. ¼ dc docket. congress upped the “amount in controversy” Congress recently lifted it from $10,000 to $75,000.

• Prisoner Petitions – prisoner complaining they are improperly convicted or suffer from poor imprisonment conditions (3,500 in 1960; 53,000 today).

IV. U.S. Court of AppealsA. 11 circuits; another DC Circuit; another Federal Circuit (also

in DC).B. 179 judges, 6-28 range; each has a chief (senior). Use 3

judge rotating panels, but by majority vote can sit en banc (all; 100 a year).

C. Caseload – 93% from dc’s, rest from administrative agencies. 57,555 cases 2002. Not matched with increase in judges.

V. U.S. Supreme CourtA. Composition: 8 + Chief (nominated for that

post by president whether from within or without the current SC).

B. Writ of certiorari – decision by SC to review (call up) lower court holdings to determine if law has been correctly applied.

C. Caseload – Writ is granted according to “rule of four” (very few % make it). Must involve a substantial federal question.

Federal Court filings have exploded (Fig 3-4)