AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT - Crawford's World

LO 3.1 11/8/2012

Back to learning objectives 1

Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman

AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT

2 | 1

Unit FivePart 2

The Judiciary


Chapter 14: The Judiciary

� The Federal Court

System

� The Politics of Appointing Judges

� How the Supreme

Court Makes

Decisions

� Judicial Power and Its Limits

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Unit Learning Objectives

The Organization of Federal Courts5.1 Outline the structure of the federal court system.

The Politics of Appointing Judges5.2 Analyze the factors that play an important role in selecting judicial nominees.

The Jurisdiction of the Federal Judiciary5.3 Determine the basic constitutional powers of the federal judiciary.

How the Supreme Court Decides5.4 Trace the process by which Supreme Court decisions are reached, and assess influences on this process.

Judicial Power and Its Limits5.5 Assess the role of the judiciary in a constitutional democracy and the limits on

judicial action.


Jurisdiction

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Civil LawA private party files the

lawsuit as the plaintiff.

Burden of proof is on the

Plaintiff

‘For the Plaintiff’ or ‘For the Defendant’ by a preponderance of the evidence

Remedy is Compensation

• The state or the people

prosecute the case.

• Presumption of Innocence;

burden of proof on the state

• ‘Guilty or Not Guilty’ beyond a reasonable doubt

• Remedy is Punishment: Fines, Imprisonment, or Execution

Criminal Law

The Jurisdiction of the Federal Judiciary5.3 Determine the basic constitutional powers of the federal

judiciary.


Article IIIList three examples of cases that would fall under the judicial power of the Federal Courts:

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;

--and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens

or subjects.

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Federal Cases

Federal question cases: involving the

U.S. Constitution, federal law, the sea,

or treaties

The Constitution or Federal laws

Treaties

Ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls

Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction

The United States government


Federal Cases

Diversity cases: involving different

states, or citizens of different states

Two or more states

A state and citizens of another state

Citizens of different states

citizens of the same state over property in a different state

a state or citizen and foreign states or citizens

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



What is “Original Jurisdiction”?

The ability and authority to hear and decide

cases for the first time based on hearing

testimony and viewing evidence

In contrast to hearing a case “on appeal”

after a verdict has been rendered.

Article III


Article III, Section 2

Under what circumstances does the Supreme Court have “original jurisdiction”?

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a stateshall 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.

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Article III, Section 2

Under what circumstances does the Supreme Court have “original jurisdiction”?

In all cases dealing with

ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls

a state government

In all the other cases

the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction


LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Procedure


Term begins the first Monday in October

Court has four week sessions:

“Sittings," two weeks for

hearing arguments

“Recesses," two weeks for

conferences and writing

opinions.

They hear as many as 24

cases each sitting.

How the Supreme Court Decides5.4 Trace the process by which Supreme Court decisions are reached, and assess influences on this process.

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



The Justices hear

arguments from October

until the end of April

During May and June, the

Justices announce

decisions

From July through September, they read petitions for writs of certiorari and discuss cases for the next term.

Procedure


Writs of Certiorari

Most cases arrive through a writ of certiorari

Requires agreement of four justices to hear the case

Involves significant federal or constitutional question

Involves conflicting decisions by circuit courts

Involves Constitutional interpretation by one of the highest state courts

7000 petitions, only around 100 granted

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Standing to Sue

There must be a real controversy between adversaries

Harm must be demonstrated

Actual

Personal

Class actions

Expenses

In forma pauperis

Fee shifting

Political Questions

Sovereign immunity


Current Cases before the Supreme CourtClapper v. Amnesty International Can citizens file suit if they reasonably

fear the government is reading their sensitive communications?

Windsor v. U.S. Does the Defense of Marriage Act violate equal protection

guarantees in the “Full Faith and Credit” clause of Article I?

Hollingsworth v. Perry Does the 14th Amendment prevent states from

defining marriage as only between a man and a woman?.

Nix v. Holder Is federal oversight of states with a history of discrimination

under the Civil Rights Act of 1965 unwarranted and burdensome?

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, Can universities take race into

account as a factor in student admissions?

Florida v. Jardines, Can police use a dog to sniff for drugs despite having

no other hard information that illegal activity was occurring?

Ryan v. Gonzales Does the defendant need to be mentally capable of

assisting his own attorney in death penalty convictions?

Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum, Can US courts hear lawsuits against

foreign corporations for violations of human rights committed abroad?

Oklahoma v. Barber Are state laws saying life begins at conception, and

giving human embryos the rights and privileges of citizens constitutional?

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Brief

Precedent!!!

Remedy

Amicus Curiae

‘Friend of the Court’

Oral Argument

Plaintiff

Defendant

Inquiry by Justices

Closing Arguments

Rebuttal

Procedure


The Supreme Court in Action

Lawyers submit briefs that set forth the facts of the case, summarize the lower court decision, gives the argument of their side of the case citing appropriate precedent, and suggests remedy

Amicus Curiae briefs are submitted

Oral arguments are given by lawyers after briefs are submitted

Justices then question the attorneys

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Inquisitorial and Adversarial LegalSystems


Adversarial Systems

Two or more opposing parties gather evidence

Parties present their evidence and arguments to a judge or jury.

The judge or jury knows nothing of the litigation until the parties present their cases.

The judge acts as a referee on points of law.

The judge or jury determine both the verdict and the remedy.

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



The Inquisitorial System

In the INQUISITORIAL system, the presiding judge is not a passive recipient of information.

The judge actively steers the search for evidence and questions the witnesses

Attorneys play a more defensive role, suggesting arguments and precedents and answering the judge’s questions.

The judge determines the verdict and the remedy.


Goal of both is to find the truth.

The adversarial system

seeks truth by pitting parties against each other in the hope competition will reveal it

the adversarial system places a premium on the

individual rights of the accused

The inquisitorial system

seeks the truth by questioning those most familiar with

the events in dispute

The inquisitorial systems places the rights of the accused secondary to the search for truth.

Inquisitorial and Adversarial Systems

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Inquisitorial and Adversarial Systems

Lower courts are Adversarial; the Supreme Court is

Inquisitorial.

Justices question and cross-examine the attorneys


Court Opinions

Per curiam: brief and unsigned

Opinion of the court: majority opinion

Concurring opinion: agrees with the

ruling of the majority opinion, but

modifies the supportive reasoning

Dissenting opinion: minority opinion

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Founders probably expected judicial

review but did not expect the federal

courts to play such a large role in policy-

making

But the federal judiciary evolved toward

judicial activism, shaped by political,

economic, and ideological forces

Judicial Power and Its Limits5.5 Assess the role of the judiciary in a constitutional

democracy and the limits on judicial action.


Judicial review: the right of the federal

courts to rule on the constitutionality of

laws and executive actions

It is the chief judicial weapon in the

checks and balances system

Marbury v Madison

McCulloch v Maryland

Judicial Review

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



“It is emphatically the

province and duty of

the judiciary to say

what the law is, and a

law repugnant to the

Constitution is void.”-John Marshall

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,

1801-1835

Marbury v. Madison

Judicial Review


Congress has implied

powers under the

Elastic Clause

Federal law is

supreme over state

law

Judicial Review

McCulloch v. Maryland

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Would Marshall have

been considered an

activist or a strict

constructionist?

Judicial Review


Roger Taney

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, 1836-

1864

Judicial ReviewDred Scott v Sanford, 1857

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



THE FACTS

Dred Scott, a slave from Missouri,

was taken by his master to Minnesota, a federal territory where slavery was illegal.

Scott filed a lawsuit in federal court claiming that he was now free.

Dred Scott


THE DECISION

The enumerated powers of the Constitution do notinclude the regulation of slavery

All Federal laws prohibiting slavery are unconstitutional

Slaves are not citizens, they are property. Therefore

cannot file lawsuits

cannot be taken from their masters without due process and adequate compensation

Blacks are not citizens of the US and cannot ever be

citizens


LO 3.1 11/8/2012



“ [Blacks] must be regarded

as beings of an inferior

order, and altogether unfit

to associate with the white

race, and having no rights

which the white man was

bound to respect..”-Roger Taney

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, 1836-

1864




Justice McLean’s Dissent

Article I, section 9 does imply federal power to regulate slavery

There is no basis for the claim

that blacks cannot be citizens.

At the time of the ratification of the Constitution, black men could

vote in ten of the thirteen states.

This fact made them citizens not

only of their states but of the United States.

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Would Taney have

been considered an

activist or a strict

constructionist?



Activist Court

The Warren Court

Brown v Board of Education

Miranda v Arizona

Gideon v Wainwright

Griswald v Connecticut

Earl Warren

Chief Justice of the Supreme Court,

1953-1969

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Rick Perry’sConstitutional Amendment

Proposal

18 YEAR TERMS FOR FEDERAL JUDGES

2/3rds VOTE OF CONGRESS TO OVERRIDE JUDICIAL DECISIONS


Arguments for Judicial Activism

Courts should correct injustices when

other branches or state governments

refuse to do so

Courts are the last resort for those

without the power or influence to gain

new laws

LO 3.1 11/8/2012


Copyright © 2011 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman 16 | 41

Arguments Against Judicial Activism

Judges lack expertise in designing and

managing complex institutions

Initiatives require balancing policy

priorities and allocating public revenues

Courts are not accountable because

judges are not elected


Checks on Judicial Power

Judges have no enforcement mechanisms

Confirmation and impeachment

proceedings

Changing the number of judges

Revising legislation

Amending the Constitution

LO 3.1 11/8/2012



Public Opinion and the Courts

Defying public opinion may be dangerous to the legitimacy of the Supreme Court

Opinion in realigning eras may energize court

Public confidence in the Supreme Court since 1966 has varied with popular support for the government generally


What constitutes treason in this section 3?

What is required to convict a person of treason?

Why do you think Treason is the only specific crime that is mentioned

in the Constitution?

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.

Documents

AP AMERICAN GOVERNMENT - Crawford's World