AP Gov Chapter 9 Review: The
Judiciary
Intro
-The inclusion of a judicial branch was a dramatic change for the new constitution
-Supreme Court has final power of constitutional review
-Constitution allows:
-Federal judiciary/federal system-“inferior courts” created by Congress
-States create their own criminal justice system and court
-Most distant branch from the average citizen
-Federal justices serve for life based on good behavior; not directly responsible to electorate
-Basis of constitutional power in Article III
-Judges appointed by president, need consent of Senate
-Judicial power covers common law, equity, civil law, criminal law, and public law
-Case decisions: either original or appellate jurisdiction
-Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over impeachment trials
Dual Court System
-Reflects shared power of national and state governments
-Although independent, state courts are linked by appeals process that allows people to challenge state statutes in federal court
-Two kinds of federal courts:
-Constitutional: carry out direction in Constitution for courts to exercise judicial power
-Special: deal w/ cases derived by delegated powers of Congress
-Military appeals, tax appeals, veteran appeals
-Jurisdiction:
-Federal:
cases w/ laws from Constitution, treaties, ambassadors, admiralty and maritime
issues,
*Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in cases involving ambassadors, public ministers and consuls, and ones in which a State is involved
-State: cases deriving from state laws
*Through appeals, these cases could end up in federal court
-Most common form of jurisdiction: concurrent
-“Judge made law”:
-Common law: based on stare decis (judicial precedent)
-Cases of equity: cases that can’t be resolved under common law and are appealed to federal courts
-Statutory law (results of legislative action, treaties, and executive orders)
-Civil law: contract issues and tort cases
-Criminal law: criminal laws passed at both federal and state level
*Some people can be tried under both federal and state statutes
-Public law: constitutional law
-Cases/Appeals: defendant/petitioner vs. plaintiff/respondent
Structure
-Judiciary Act of 1789: allowed creation of district courts
-currently 94 courts
-handle 80% of cases brought to them
-each state has at least one federal district
-1st court for hearing cases w/ federal crimes, civil suits w/ federal law, bankruptcy, admiralty and maritime, and immigration
-
-bring cases to district courts
-Congress established courts of appeal in 1891
-intermediate before Supreme Court
-currently 12 courts
-Supreme Court Justice is a liaison
-review decisions of district and special courts
-review and enforce decisions of federal agencies
-review appeals from state courts
Selection of Justices
-involves executive and legislative branches
-input from American Bar Association
-President needs Senate approval for all federal judgeships
-Senatorial courtesy: senators of particular state give approval of nominee
*Doesn’t apply to Supreme Court nominations
-Nominee must appear before Senate Judiciary Committee
-Review:
-judicial ideology
-constitutional precedent
-judicial activism
-legal writings
-past judicial decisions
-Complete background check by Department of Justice
-Lower court judges chosen by recommendations of other officials, not by President
-often give to nominee because of prior political support to President or party
Limited Number of
Cases
-Four Supreme Court Justices must agree to review a case before it’s put on the docket
-Writ of certiorari (“To be made certain): appeal heard based on 5 criteria
-if court made decision that conflicts w/ precedent
-if court has come up w/ a new question
-if one court of appeals made a decision that conflicts w/ another
-other inconsistencies between courts of different states
-split decision in court of appeals
-Once writ is granted, need:
-transcripts of appeal
-petitioner and respondent briefs from their lawyers
-must be certain length, color of paper, and in window of time
-amicus curiae “friend of the court” briefs if desired
-Attorneys are grilled for 30 minutes by 9 justices
-Solicitor General of
-9 justices conference and reach decision
-majority
-concurring
-dissenting
-Chief justice assigns a justice to write majority opinion
-Other justices include their view if they have a different opinion
-Outcome of case announced months later
-Significant cases: Chief Justice reads decision
-Pur curiam decision-decision w/o explanation
-Decision becomes public policy
-Executive branch, legislature, or regulatory agencies must implement decision
-States may be required to change laws
Effect on Public
Policy
-John
-Marbury v.
-Gibbons
v.
-
McCulloch v.
-
-rulings contributed to Civil War
-gave
-Dred Scott Decision
-could try
Southern sympathizers in
-President could take away civil liberties during national emergency
-Salmon Chase Court (during Reconstruction)
-reversed statutes passed by radical Republicans
-angry Congress reduced appellate powers
-less active role once Grant elected
-Industrial period/progressive era/Great Depression
-economic issues
-Swift v.
-Schechter Poultry Corporation v.
-
-most activist court
-determined future of civil rights movement
-overturned
Plessy v. Ferguson
-expanded rights of the accused and ordered states to reapportion legislature
-
-more
conservative than
-rulings bothered strict constructionists
-upheld affirmative action programs; continued desegregation and rights of the accused
-limited aspects of Miranda decision
-Roe v. Wade
-
-
-most conservative court in history
-reversed many of Warren and Burger rulings
-many swing votes; majority opinion shifts with each case
-new form of judicial activism (decisions that overturn precedent): “conservative activism”
-cases that overturn federal laws send message that federal government is using too much of its inherent powers to create law
Judicial Philosophy
-strict constructionists v. loose constructionist: judicial restraint v. activist
-Critics of activism:
-feel civil liberty decisions create society w/o moral fiber
-feel judges have too much freedom
-not Court’s responsibility to set policy on issues like abortion
-feel Court should facilitate policies instead of initiate them
-irony: want precedents made by activist courts to be followed
-Supporters of activism:
-want justices to protect rights of the accused and minority interests
-Supreme Court should be a watchdog and maintain checks and balances
-need to stop states from trying to undermine court decisions and national law through their own laws
-wants Court to make crucial decisions to realize interests of government
Key Terms
-amicus curiae -majority opinion
-appellate jurisdiction -
-Burger court -McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
-cases of equity -oral argument
-civil law -original jurisdiction
-common law -precedent
-concurring opinion -public law
-constitutional courts -Rehnquist court
-criminal law -senate confirmation
-dissenting opinion -special courts
-Fletcher v. Peck -stare decis
-Gibbon v.
-judicial activism -
-judicial restraint -writ of certiorari
-judiciary committee