The Federal Courts
American
Government, Chapter 13
Objectives
role of the courts
the federal court system
the Supreme Court and policy-making system
judicial Review
strict v. loose construction of the
Constitution
selection of justices
how cases get to the Supreme Court
deciding to decide
The
Constitution and the Creation of the Federal Judiciary
All federal courts: ΰ
Districts courts, Appeals courts
(circuit courts) and the U.S. Supreme
Court are created
by Congress under the
instructions of the
Role of the Courts are to:
settle disputes
interpret statutory laws (laws written by
legislatures
but not amended into the constitutions).
punish criminals
award damages in civil cases
Basic limitations of
the courts:
Courts
rulings carry a lot of weight but courts have neither
the power of the purse, nor the
sword.
In other
words, the courts can rule on issues, but cannot force
compliance of these rulings and
cannot fund programs either.
Federal
courts must rely on Congress and the executive
branch to implement their rulings.
Court Neutrality
Are
members of courts neutral in their rulings? ΰ no
Courts,
and especially the Supreme Court, are NOT neutral in their rulings because
they
are political institutions like Congress and the president and they take sides.
Structure & jurisdiction of federal courts
The
matters assigned to them by Congress.
Currently,
1 chief justice and 8 associate justices
senatorial courtesy does
not apply to nominations.
Formerly known as the Circuit Courts of Appeals
»
Courts of
Appeals ΰhas
no original jurisdiction.
»
Hears appeals from federal districts courts &
US regulatory commissions
Senatorial courtesy does not apply to
nominations
District
Courts or Legislative trial Courts
ΰhas original jurisdiction over US Constitution,
federal civil and criminal cases, other matters
assigned to them by Congress.
Senatorial
courtesy applies to nominations.
Senatorial Courtesy
allows senators from the presidents party to
veto
judicial appointments from the senators state.
Jurisdiction
There are two basic types
of jurisdictions:
(a) Original
Jurisdiction
is a
court's authority to serve as the place where the facts
of
a given case is initially argued and decided.
(b) Appellate
jurisdiction is the power to review or revise a lower court decision.
the U.S.
Supreme Court has both types of jurisdiction.
about 6
percent of Supreme Court's caseload consists of original jurisdiction cases.
The remaining 94 percent of the cases come
to it through the appeals process.
Classification of disputes:
(disputes are either criminal or civil cases)
(a) Criminal case
In a criminal case, a law is allegedly violated
& a defendant stands accused.
a
prosecutor tries the case for the government.
the role
of the court is to guide & referee the dispute.
one
judge or jury rules on the defendant guilt or innocence and assess punishment.
the burden of proof is on the state/prosecutor
to prove the
accused
guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
that is
the 12 jurors must find the defendant guilty or else there is a mistrial.
Types of federal criminal cases
postal
theft; bank robbery;
counterfeiting; threatening the
president.
Civil cases
the
issue is not the violation of a penal law.
it is a
private conflict between two parties.
a
plaintiff initiates the suit asking for monetary damages.
the
defendant is the responding party.
the
burden of proof is on the plaintiff.
the plaintiff is required to prove the case
merely
by a
preponderance of the evidence.
Types of Federal civil cases
bankruptcy petition; patent dispute; Civil Rights cases; Antitrust cases
Cases involving two parties from different
states over $75,000.
examples of
civil cases in general:
property ownership ΰover
ownership of real estate
contract cases ΰdisputes
over written or implied legal
agreements
domestic disputesΰ
between husband & wife
tort case
ΰ
involve personal injury or damage to property.
Different forms of law
what is
law? Law is a prescribed rules of conduct accepted by
the society.
(1) common
law
is the oldest form of law
is based on local customs and precedents
sets
precedent for deciding future similar cases.
(2) Equity law
ΰ allows a judge to do
what is fair in a particular case
regardless
of the precedent of the common law.
(3) stare decisis
ΰ is the judicial principle that the issue has already
been decided in earlier cases.
ΰi.e. the
decision on the second case should be decided in accordance
with the earlier
decision.
(4) statutory law ΰ laws
written by the legislature but not amended into
the constitution.
(5) administrative law
ΰrules
adopted by regulatory government agencies
such as (OSHA, FDA, EPA).
(6) Constitutional law
ΰ involves interpretation and application of the law.
ΰ is the highest form of
Court procedures
Involves a trial judge, jury, eyewitnesses
& evidence and
Litigants ΰ are
parties involved in a case.
Adversary proceeding ΰallows
each side in a law suit to present evidence
and arguments to bolster its position
while re-butting the other side.
Plea bargain ΰ this
is when the court allows a defendant to plead guilty
to lesser crime in order to receive
lesser punishment.
Standing means
individuals or firms have legal standing when they are
prosecuted by the government for
violation of laws or regulations.
Differences between a trial and
appeal
Trial ΰis
the formal examination of a civil or a criminal action as it
applies
to the fact and law.
ΰ a single judge presides during a trial.
Appeal ΰ is
the taking of case from a lower court to a higher court by a losing party.
ΰ
Appeals Courts do not re-try cases.
ΰ
there are panel of judges that make
decisions based upon
law and the
Constitution.
ΰ the
panel of judges review written & oral arguments
presented by
attorneys and the written records of the
lower court
proceedings to make sure the defendants
rights were
not violated.
Constitutional
power of federal courts:
The Constitution grants judicial
power of the
and other inferior courts that Congress may establish.
the Judiciary Act
of 1789 established the federal court system.
Article VI (6)
of the US Constitution states that the Constitution is the
"supreme Law of the Land".
But Judicial Powers of
the court is found in Article III of the US Constitution.
The Constitution also
guarantees that:
a) federal judiciary to be politically independent.
b) the judges should be appointed for life and not to be elected.
c) their salaries should never be reduced.
d) that they can be impeached if they commit impeachable offenses.
Types of cases and
controversies that federal courts may decide include:
cases
arising under the US Constitution, federal laws, and treaties.
cases in
which federal government or foreign governments are a party.
cases
between states or between citizens of different states.
Role of the
Most scholars & jurists agreed around 1800 that the
Constitution granted
judicial authority to
the Supreme Court and the federal judiciary.
The main questions were
therefore:
1) who
should interpret the Constitution i.e. Judicial Review and can
declare laws
of Congress, laws of the states and
actions of the
president unconstitutional and invalid?
2) how
should the constitution be interpreted (strict or loose)
The Supreme Court itself addressed both
questions as shown below.
who should interpret the Constitution?
The Supreme Court chose the role of
Judicial Review in Marbury
vs.
John Adams, a loose constructionist president
was leaving office as the president.
Thomas Jefferson, a strict constructionist
president
was coming into office of the president.
John Adams made scores of appointments
before he left office:
ΰ Marbury as Justice of Peace in
ΰMarshall,
Adams former Secretary of State as Chief Justice
to Supreme Court
ΰ
to the Supreme Court.
ΰ so Marbury filed law suit asking the Supreme court to issue
a writ of
Mandamus against
commission) so he
can assume his judgeship.
ΰ
Supreme Court refused to issue such a command.
Supreme Court ruling
John Marshall ruled that:
ΰMarburys Commission should not be delivered to him
because
the power of writ of mandamus that Congress
granted
to the Supreme Court in the Judiciary Act of 1789 was
unconstitutional.
significance of the ruling
(1) For the first time,
the S. Court invalidated an action of
another branch
of government ΰCongress's
(writ of
mandamus)
(2) Supreme Court
therefore used this case to assume the role
of Judicial
Review and the authority to
review future
Statutory laws,
state laws & presidential actions.
How should the
constitution be interpreted (strictly or loosely)
Supporters of Loose interpretation or Judicial activism believe:
that the Constitution should
be interpreted broadly
because it is difficult to ascertain the Framers
original intent
and because the
Constitution is a living document,
most jurists
believe that it should be interpreted according
to the
morality of society today.
loose constructionist are
headed by:
ΰAlexander Hamilton, James Madison (R party)
Supporters of Strict Construction or judicial restraint believe:
that the Constitution should
be interpreted narrowly
that judges should stick
close to the literal meaning
of the words of the Constitution
that judges should not be law makers but should practice self-restraint
and defer to the policy judgments of elected
branches of government.
that Court justices
should apply the Founders original intent
to current conditions.Strict constructionist
are
headed by:
ΰ headed by Thomas Jefferson.
Loose Construction
John Marshalls Supreme Court opted for
loose
construction in McCulloch vs. Maryland
(1819).
Issues raised by the case:
is Congress
empowered to charter a bank? ΰ yes
Can state levy taxes on a branch of Fed. Govt.?
ΰno
Which govt. has Supremacy power? ΰnational govt.
first bank was charted in 1791
Federalist loved it & states lead by
The bank cashier, McCulloch refused to pay the
state tax.
Supreme Court ruling
(1) Congress can create a bank ΰ it is Implied in the
Constitution because of the
Necessary
and Proper clause of the delegated powers to national government.
(2) States can not levy taxes on
any branch of Fed. Govt. because
states
will eventually destroy the federal government
since
power to tax is power to destroy.
(3) National govt. has Supremacy
power over states
if
it behaves in accordance with the Constitution.
Supreme Court
Judicial policy-making powers comes
from:
(1) Judicial
Review ΰ is the power of Supreme Court that can
declare
laws of Congress, laws of the states
and actions of the president
unconstitutional and invalid.
(2) Cumulative
policy-making ΰis when judges make consistent decisions on
the same subject on an extended period of time and
arrive at the same decision.
(3) Setting precedents
ΰthis
is when courts ruling sets a basis for
deciding
future similar cases (Gideon v. Wainwright 1963 ) ΰ
that
requires free legal counsel be appointed for all indigent
criminal
defendants who cannot afford a lawyer in order to
be
in accordance with 14th Amendment of equality.
Political History of the Supreme
Court & Policy-making
From 1789-1800
Supreme Court was
relatively unimportant
Supreme Court reviewed
only 50 cases.
Supreme
Court have been all males, until 1981 when
Sandra Day O'Connor was nomited by pres. Reagan.
From 1801-1835
Chief Justice John Marshall was in charge of
the Supreme Court
He built the prestige of the Supreme Court the
cases of
ΰMarbury vs.
ΰMcCulloch vs.
From 1836-1864
Roger Taney was in charge of the Supreme Court.
This was the Period of slavery controversy
Court was sympathetic to slavery & states
rights
The court expanded the Reserved
powers of the states over federal government
and declared the Missouri Compromise
unconstitutional & that
Fed. Govt. could not prohibit slavery (Dred Scott, 1857).
The court also limited federal regulatory
powers.
From 1866-1896
After Civil War & during
Reconstruction
The court protected property rights of business
corporations.
but ignored Civil Rights of Blacks
& even struck down laws prohibiting child labor.
Supported Southern segregation Jim Crow laws in
Plessy vs.
From 1937-1986
Chief Justice Earl Warren in charge
Court shifted to social agenda, protecting
(civil liberties & civil rights)
Court overturned Plessy
v. Ferguson with Brown vs. Board of
Education (1954)
Exclusionary rule was extended to cover states
Ruled in Miranda vs. Arizona
that police must read to suspects their rights.
From 1986-present
Conservative justices dominate the
Supreme Court
Chief justice William Rehnquist in charge
(1986-2005)
Chief justice John Roberts in charge
(2005-present)
Court started to shift away from protection of
Civil Liberties and Civil Rights.
Started to applying states Reserved
power over Fed. Govt. again
Started to weaken Affirmative Actions
Started to apply Strict Judicial Scrutiny to
minority set aside programs
Rehnquists Court may best be remembered for Bush
v. Gore.
Politics of Selecting
justices
Selecting federal judges is one of the
presidents most important responsibilities.
Presidents prefer nominees who share their
political philosophy
Presidents also look at competence & ethics
Senate confirms or reject after hearings with
majority vote
Involves Litmus Test ΰnominees
stand on key issues the
president and his party support.
Cases
that tend to be accepted by the court share the following characteristics:
federal
government asked for the review
conflict
among circuit courts on the issue
civil
rights or civil liberties question
an
ideological or policy preference of the justices
significant
political or social interest as evidenced by the
presence
of interest group amicus curiae briefs
Processes through which cases get to
the Supreme Court
(1) appeals
ΰfrom
lower courts
(2) original
jurisdiction ΰthe
Supreme Court has original
jurisdiction
over the case.
(3) writ
of certiorari ΰthe
Supreme Court orders a lower court to
prepare
the record of a case & send it up for review.
deciding to
decide
not all the cases that
are appealed to the Supreme Court are accepted by the court.
Cases are accepted through 3 channels:
(1) rule of 4 ΰ used
by the Supreme Court to determine which
cases
on appeal to consider.
(2) test cases ΰ
cases initiated to assess the constitutionality of a
legislative
act. (Roe v. Wade)
(3) Amicus curiae or friend of the court briefs ΰthese
are legal
arguments
or briefs presented by 3rd parties (government or
interest
groups) not directly involved in the case asking the court to review the case.
Writing opinions
After deciding a cases, the court write opinions explaining
how they
arrive at their various decisions.
(1) Majority
opinion ΰsubscribed to by a majority of the judges
(2) dissenting
opinion ΰa
judicial statement that disagrees with
the decision of
the courts majority
(3) concurring opinion ΰis
when a judge agrees with the
majority opinion
but disagrees with the rationale for the
majority decision.
The poor also has access to
the Supreme Court
in
forma pauperis ΰa
process whereby indigents can appeal
their
cases to the Supreme Court without paying the usual court fees.
K. Ituah