Transcript Judicial Branch Publications - Augusta County Public Schools

The Judicial Branch
What courts do
1. Interpret laws passed by legislatures.
Interpret: To decide the meaning of.
• The U.S. Supreme Court interprets the U.S. Constitution
• State supreme courts interpret state constitutions.
2. Settle disputes between people, or between
people and the government.
3. Conduct criminal trials to determine a person’s
guilt or innocence.
4. Protect people’s rights.
Alexander Hamilton: The Federalist #22
We need a third
branch of the
government that
will “define the true
meaning and
operation” of the
laws.
The Framers: Courts would have a
traditional role
The courts should not make
policy, they should simply
find and apply existing law.
Right! The courts will be
neutral and passive in public
affairs.
The Framers: Courts would have a
traditional role
• Federal courts have evolved toward judicial
activism.
• Later judges believed that courts should also “make
law.”
• Through history, political, economic
and ideological forces have led to
increased court activism.
I should’ve seen that
coming!
Article III of the Constitution
Article III
[Section 1.] The judicial Power
of the United States shall be
vested in one supreme Court,
and in such inferior Courts as
the Congress may from time
to time ordain and establish.
The Judges, both of the supreme
and inferior Courts, shall hold
their Offices during good
Behaviour, and shall, at stated
Times, receive for their Services
a Compensation, which shall not
be diminished during their
Continuance in Office.
Section 1
• Establishes a Supreme
Court
• Gives Congress the power
to establish lower courts.
• Judges serve “during
good behavior.”
Article III of the Constitution
Article III
[Section 2.]
The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in
Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the
United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under
their Authority; -- to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other
public Ministers and Consuls; -- to all Cases of admiralty and
maritime Jurisdiction; -- to Controversies to which the United
States shall be a Party; -- to Controversies between two or more
States; -- between a State and Citizens of another State; -between Citizens of different States; -- between Citizens of the
same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and
between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States,
Citizens or Subjects.
In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and
Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme
Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases
before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate
Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and
under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be
by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said
Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed
within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the
Congress may by Law have directed.
Section 2
• Defines jurisdiction of
Supreme Court.
• Guarantees right to trial
by jury.
Article III of the Constitution
Article III
[Section 3.] Treason against
the United States shall consist
only in levying War against
them, or in adhering to their
Enemies, giving them Aid and
Comfort. No Person shall be
convicted of Treason unless on the
Testimony of two Witnesses to the
same overt Act, or on Confession in
open Court.
The Congress shall have Power to
declare the Punishment of Treason,
but no Attainder of Treason shall
work Corruption of Blood, or
Forfeiture except during the Life of
the Person attainted.
Section 3
• Defines treason and gives
Congress the power to set
punishment for treason.
Jurisdiction Vocabulary
• Jurisdiction: A court’s authority to hear and decide a case.
• Original jurisdiction: ….to be the first court to hear and decide
certain types of cases.
• Appellate jurisdiction: ….to review decisions made by lower
courts.
• Exclusive jurisdiction: The sole right of a court to hear and
decide a case.
• Concurrent jurisdiction: cases that fall under jurisdiction of
both state and federal courts.
A dual court system
U.S. Supreme
Court
State Supreme
Courts
U.S. Courts of
Appeals
State Appeals Courts
U.S. District Courts
State Trial Courts
Federal Court System
U.S.
Supreme
Court
Circuit Courts
of Appeals
U.S. District Courts
Federal Court System
• 94 of them.
U.S.
Supreme
Court
Circuit Courts
of Appeals
U.S. District Courts
• Have original jurisdiction in most
federal cases.
• All cases involve federal law.
• The main trial court in the
federal system.
• Most decisions made in district
courts are final.
Federal Court System
• 12 federal appeals courts in U.S.
U.S.
Supreme
Court
Courts
of Appeals
U.S. District Courts
• They are regional courts.
• Only hear cases on appeal.
• Judges review case record and
“affirm” or “reverse” lower court’s
ruling.
• Decisions are final unless the S.C.
agrees to hear the appeal.
Federal Court System
• Highest court in the U.S.
U.S.
Supreme
Court
Circuit Courts
of Appeals
U.S. District Courts
• “Court of last resort.” No appeal
from Supreme Court.
• Final authority on meaning of the
Constitution.
• Only hears cases it wants to. Most
cases involve a constitutional
question.
• Nine judges.
The U.S. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction
in cases:
• which involve two states in a dispute.
• which involve representatives of foreign
governments.
Judicial Review




Judicial review is the power
of a court to decide if a law
goes against the Constitution,
and overturn it.
This power is not mentioned
in the Constitution.
Judicial review was
established by the Supreme
Court in Marbury v. Madison
(1803).
Marbury's effect -- the
Supreme Court has the final
say in what the Constitution
means.
John Marshall
Chief Justice, U.S. Supreme Court
1801-1835
I feel so powerful.
Judicial
review rocks!
The Constitution
means what I say
it means.
Judicial Review
Judicial Activism or Judicial Restraint?
Judicial Activism: judges can adapt the meaning of the
Constitution to reflect modern realities.
“[T]he judiciary must do more than dispense justice in cases and controversies. It
must also keep the charter of government current with the times and not allow it to
become archaic or out of tune with the needs of the day.”
Justice William O. Douglas
Judicial Restraint: A judge should interpret the Constitution
according to the Framers’ original intent.
“It can never be emphasized too much that one's own opinion about the wisdom
or evil of a law should be excluded altogether when one is doing one's duty on
the bench.”
Justice Felix Frankfurter
Judicial Review
Judicial Activism or Judicial Restraint?
•
Most judges declare a belief in judicial
restraint.
•
The power of judicial review implies some
measure of judicial activism.
•
Best example of social value of judicial
activism: ending racial segregation.
•
Current issues involving judicial activism:
abortion, gay marriage, school prayer,
death penalty.
Judicial Activism
PERRY V. SCHWARZENEGGER
(Now: Hollingsworth v. Perry)
• Issue: same-sex marriage
• Liberal activism
• The people of California, through the initiative process,
created a state law prohibiting same-sex marriage.
• Judge Vaughn Walker found that the law is unconstitutional.
o Historical context (times have changed)
o Due process clause (14th Amendment)
o Equal protection clause (14th Amendment)
• Judge’s decision = new law
Judicial Activism
CITIZENS UNITED V. FEDERAL ELECTION
COMMISSION
• Issue: campaign contributions by interest groups
• Conservative activism
• Congress passed the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform
Act of 2002 (McCain-Feingold) which regulates “electioneering
communication.”
• Supreme Court found that this law inhibited the free speech
of corporations.
o Corporations are legally “individuals.”
o 1st Amendment protects individual rights.
• 5-4 decision = new law
Judicial Activism
• Advantages
o Courts can correct injustices created by other
branches.
o Laws can be changed when circumstances in
society changes.
o Courts can protect rights of the politically
powerless.
• Criticisms
o Judges are not politically accountable.
o Laws reflect the will of the people and judges
must respect that.
o Judges lack expertise on complex details of
policy.
Judicial Review
Judicial Activism or
Judicial Restraint?
Any time that a judge
overturns a law passed by
the legislature or the
voters, judicial activism has
occurred.
How the Framers designed things
The People
The People
Electoral College
State legislatures
President
U.S. Senate
Federal
Judges
After Seventeenth Amendment
The People
The People
Electoral College
U.S. Senate
President
Federal
Judges
Who are Federal Judges?
Typically, federal judges have:

held previous political office
such as prosecutor or state
court judge

taught law at a university

prior judicial experience

been lawyers
Women of the Supreme Court
Sonia Sotomayor,
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Elena Kagan
Who are Federal Judges?
Presidents usually
nominate people to be
federal judges who reflect
the president’s own
political beliefs.
President Obama nominates Elena Kagan
to be Supreme Court Justice.
Who are Federal Judges?
Once confirmed, the judges will serve for many years,
ensuring that the president’s political influence will continue
for many years.
Sonya Sotomayor faces questions from the
Senate Judiciary Committee (July 2009).
Who are Federal Judges?
“I would hope that a wise Latina
woman with the richness of her
experiences would more often than
not reach a better conclusion than
a white male who hasn’t lived that
life.”
Sonya Sotomayor, 2001
in a speech to students at UC-Berkeley
Federal Selection Process
President
Senators
Dept. of
Justice
ABA
Interest Groups
Senate
Jud. Comm.
Senate
Sonya Sotomayor
was confirmed by a
vote of 68-31.
9 of 40 Republicans
supported her
confirmation.
The U.S. Supreme Court

Highest court in the land.

NINE Justices




All but six have been white men.
African-American (2):Thurgood Marshall and Clarence
Thomas
Women (4): Sandra Day O’Connor , Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
Sonya Sotomayor, Elena Kagan
Hispanic (1): Sonya Sotomayor
Thurgood Marshall
The U.S. Supreme Court



Chief Justice: John Roberts
Selects about 100 of the over
7,000 cases that are submitted to
it each year.
Chooses cases that
•
•
•
Involve significant Constitutional
questions
Involve other important legal
questions
Are important to the entire country.
John Roberts
Chief Justice 2005 - present

Will not hear cases if they believe
the lower court made the correct
decision.
Supreme Court Decisions


Majority vote required to determine outcome of case.
Write opinions.




Majority opinion: states court’s decision.
Dissenting opinion: states reasons why judge(s) disagreed
with majority opinion.
Concurring opinion: states reasons why a judge agrees with
the decision but for a different reason.
Courts do not have the power to enforce their decisions.
The executive branch must enforce the Court’s
decisions.
Powers of the Supreme Court
Power
Powers of
the U.S.
Supreme
Court
Example
Judicial
Review
Explains what the
U.S. Constitution
means. What does
“unreasonable
search” mean?
Interpreting
Laws
What does “uses”
mean when a law
says “uses a gun?”
How the Justices Vote

Judicial Philosophy



Judicial Restraint - advocates minimalist roles for
judges
Judicial Activism - feels that judges should use the law
to promote justice, equality, and personal liberty.
Precedent


Prior judicial decisions serve as a rule for settling later
cases of a similar nature.
Precedents can change over time

Ex. Plessy vs. Ferguson and Brown vs. Board of Education
The Supreme Court’s Decision Making
Process
Lawyers
submit briefs
to justices.
Justices read
briefs.
Court hears
oral
arguments. A
lawyer from
each side
gets 30
minutes.
Judges ask
lawyers
questions.
Justices get
together in
conference
to discuss
case. Then
they vote.
Justices
write
opinions to
explain the
reasons for
their
decision.
The Court’s
decision is
announced
to the
public.
How things work:
D.C. v. Heller (2008)

1975: The Washington, D.C. city council passes
the Firearms Control Regulation Act of 1975.



Banned ownership of handguns, fully-automatic
weapons and high-capacity semi-automatic weapons.
Guns owned before the law went into effect were
“grandfathered.”
Required that all guns in a person’s home be
"unloaded, disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock
or similar device"
How things work: D.C. v. Heller (2008)


The law was unchallenged for 27 years.
In 2003, a group of six D.C. gun owners filed a lawsuit in
federal district court claiming it violated the 2nd Amendment
to the U.S. Constitution.

The district court dismissed the lawsuit.

The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.


The Circuit Court ruled 2-1 to reverse the district court’s
decision and declared the law to be unconstitutional.
The dissenting judge believed that the 2nd Amendment
establishes a state right to a militia, not an individual right.
How things work:
D.C. v Heller (2008)


The D.C. City Council and the Mayor asked the Circuit Court
for a re-hearing. The court denied the request, so they
appealed to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court agreed to hear the case because it
wanted to answer an important constitutional question:
Does the 2nd Amendment establish a state’s right to have a
militia OR an individual right to own firearms?
How things work:
D.C. v Heller (2008)




The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that in the United States
individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms for
traditional purposes including self-defense. The decision
applied only to federal enclaves.
In 2010, the Supreme Court applied the individual right to
own firearms to the states in McDonald v. Chicago.
These cases set a precedent: a court case that guides
judges’ decisions in later cases.
In their dissenting opinions, Justices Stevens and Breyer
argued that the 2nd Amendment protects a “militia” right,
not an individual right.
Other federal court officers
U.S. Solicitor General
•
Third highest ranking officer in
Dept. of Justice.
•
Decides what cases the
government will appeal from
lower courts.
•
Personally approves every case
the government presents to
Supreme Court.
Donald Verrilli, Jr.
U.S. Solicitor General
Other federal court officers
U.S. Attorneys
• The government’s
prosecutors.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder
• Work closely with the FBI
and other law enforcement
agencies to bring to trial
people charged with federal
crimes.
Other federal court officers
U.S. Magistrate
• Handle a number of legal
matters once dealt with by
federal judges.
• Examples: issuing arrest
warrants, setting bail
• Try people on minor
offenses.
U.S. Magistrate
Other federal court officers
U.S. Marshals
• Make arrests in federal
criminal cases
• Hold accused people in
custody
• Serve legal papers
• Help emergency situations
like riots.
The Virginia Court System
State Supreme Court
(seven justices)
Reviews cases from Appeals
Court and some cases from
Circuit Court.
Court of Appeals
(three justices)
Review Circuit Court cases.
Circuit Courts
(judge and jury.)
•Try criminal cases that might lead to jail terms.
•Hear civil cases involving mounts over $1,000
•Retry cases from district courts.
The Virginia Court System
State Supreme Court
Court of Appeals
Circuit Courts
Juvenile & Domestic
Relations Court
(judge)
District Courts
(judge)
•Minor crimes
• Offenses committed by
juveniles.
•Traffic violations
• Offenses against children.
Small Claims Court
(judge)
• Civil cases involving
amounts under $1,000.
Magistrates
• Issue arrest
warrants.
• Offenses committed by one
family member against
another.
The Virginia Court System “Sandwich”
State Supreme
Court
Court of Appeals
Circuit Courts
District Courts
Juvenile & Domestic
Relations Court
Important Civil and Criminal Law
Terminology

Criminal Law – Laws that
regulate public conduct and set out
duties owed to society
 Criminal Case: Court determines
whether person accused of
breaking law is guilty or
innocent
 Prosecution (government) vs.
defendant
 Standard of Proof: Guilt
beyond a reasonable doubt
(must not have any doubt that
defendant committed crime)

Civil Law – Laws that regulate
relationship between
individuals/groups of individuals
 Civil Case: Court settles a
disagreement over issues such
as contracts, divorce, accidents
 Plaintiff (individual bringing
complaint) vs. defendant
 Standard of Proof:
Preponderance of evidence
(more likely than not the
plaintiff’s version of case is
true)