The Federal Court The Federal Court

SystemSystemSystemSystemSSCG16 The student will demonstrate knowledge of the operation of the federal

judiciary.

a. explain the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the state courtsb. examine how John Marshall established the Supreme Court as an independent, coequal

branch of government through his opinions in Marbury v. Madisonc. describe how the Supreme Court decides cases

d. compare the philosophies of judicial activism and judicial restraint

Powers of the Fed CourtsPowers of the Fed Courts

�� Federal courts are generally created by the Federal courts are generally created by the United States Congress under the constitutional United States Congress under the constitutional power described in Article III.power described in Article III.

�� These courts are much more independent of These courts are much more independent of �� These courts are much more independent of These courts are much more independent of Congress and the President.Congress and the President.

�� Article III requires the establishment of a Article III requires the establishment of a Supreme Court and permits the Congress to Supreme Court and permits the Congress to create other federal courts, and place limitations create other federal courts, and place limitations on their jurisdiction. on their jurisdiction.

�� Jurisdiction Jurisdiction is the is the authority to hear certain authority to hear certain cases.cases.

�� Federal courts have Federal courts have jurisdiction in cases that jurisdiction in cases that involve United States involve United States involve United States involve United States laws, treaties with other laws, treaties with other countries, or countries, or interpretations of the interpretations of the Constitution. (Also hear Constitution. (Also hear cases involving cases involving bankruptcy & maritime bankruptcy & maritime law)law)

JurisdictionJurisdiction

�� Federal courts also have jurisdiction over cases Federal courts also have jurisdiction over cases

involving certain persons:involving certain persons:

�� Ambassadors/representatives of foreign Ambassadors/representatives of foreign

governmentsgovernments

�� 2 or more state governments2 or more state governments

�� The US government or office/agency ofThe US government or office/agency of

�� Citizens who are residents of different statesCitizens who are residents of different states

�� Citizens who are residents of the same state but Citizens who are residents of the same state but

claim lands under grants from different states.claim lands under grants from different states.

�� Concurrent jurisdiction occurs when both state Concurrent jurisdiction occurs when both state and federal court appear to have jurisdiction.and federal court appear to have jurisdiction.

�� Ex: A case involving citizens from different Ex: A case involving citizens from different states in a dispute concerning more than states in a dispute concerning more than states in a dispute concerning more than states in a dispute concerning more than $75,000. A person may sue in federal or state $75,000. A person may sue in federal or state court but if the person being sued insists, the court but if the person being sued insists, the case must be tried in federal court.case must be tried in federal court.

Original/AppellateOriginal/Appellate

�� The court in which a case is originally tried is The court in which a case is originally tried is known as a known as a trial courttrial court. A trial court has original . A trial court has original jurisdiction.jurisdiction.

�� If a person loses a case in trial court and wishes If a person loses a case in trial court and wishes �� If a person loses a case in trial court and wishes If a person loses a case in trial court and wishes to appeal the decision, he or she may take the to appeal the decision, he or she may take the case to the court with appellate jurisdiction. case to the court with appellate jurisdiction.

�� If a person loses in the court of appeals, he or If a person loses in the court of appeals, he or she may appeal to the Supreme Court, (which she may appeal to the Supreme Court, (which has both original and appellate jurisdiction.has both original and appellate jurisdiction.

Developing Supreme Court PowerDeveloping Supreme Court Power

�� Early in the court’s history, it was established Early in the court’s history, it was established that the Supreme Court, nor any other federal that the Supreme Court, nor any other federal court may initiate action. (A judge/justice can court may initiate action. (A judge/justice can not seek out an issue and request that the parties not seek out an issue and request that the parties not seek out an issue and request that the parties not seek out an issue and request that the parties bring their case before the court)bring their case before the court)

�� The court must wait for The court must wait for litigantslitigants, those involved , those involved in a lawsuit, to come before themin a lawsuit, to come before them

John MarshallJohn Marshall

�� John MarshallJohn Marshall shaped shaped American constitutional law American constitutional law and made the Supreme Court and made the Supreme Court a center of power. a center of power.

�� The longest serving Chief The longest serving Chief Justice in Justice in Supreme CourtSupreme CourtJustice in Justice in Supreme CourtSupreme Courthistory, Marshall established history, Marshall established that the courts are entitled to that the courts are entitled to exercise exercise judicial reviewjudicial review, the , the power to strike down laws power to strike down laws that violate the Constitution. that violate the Constitution.

�� He repeatedly confirmed the He repeatedly confirmed the supremacy of federal law supremacy of federal law over state law and supported over state law and supported an expansive reading of the an expansive reading of the enumerated powersenumerated powers. .

Due ProcessDue Process

�� Following the Civil War, the Supreme Court issued Following the Civil War, the Supreme Court issued

several rulings on the 13several rulings on the 13thth, 14, 14thth, & 15, & 15thth Amendments. Amendments.

These amendments were intended to ensure the rights These amendments were intended to ensure the rights

of newly freed African Americans, BUT the Court did of newly freed African Americans, BUT the Court did

not apply the not apply the due process clausedue process clause of the 14of the 14ththnot apply the not apply the due process clausedue process clause of the 14of the 14thth

Amendment when individuals challenged business or Amendment when individuals challenged business or

state interests. state interests.

�� The due process clause says that no state may deprive The due process clause says that no state may deprive

any person of life, liberty, or property without the due any person of life, liberty, or property without the due

process of law.process of law.

Landmark CasesLandmark Cases

�� Fletcher v. PeckFletcher v. Peck (1810), (1810), was one of the first cases was one of the first cases in which the Supreme in which the Supreme Court ruled a state law Court ruled a state law unconstitutional. unconstitutional. unconstitutional. unconstitutional.

�� It is the earliest case of It is the earliest case of the Court asserting its the Court asserting its right to invalidate state right to invalidate state laws conflicting with the laws conflicting with the Constitution. Constitution.

�� Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison, is a landmark case in U.S. , is a landmark case in U.S. law. It formed the basis for the exercise of law. It formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the U.S. under Article III of the judicial review in the U.S. under Article III of the Constitution. Constitution.

�� Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison was the first time the was the first time the Supreme Supreme CourtCourt declared something "declared something "unconstitutionalunconstitutional," and ," and CourtCourt declared something "declared something "unconstitutionalunconstitutional," and ," and established the concept of established the concept of judicial reviewjudicial review in the in the U.S. (the idea that courts may oversee and nullify U.S. (the idea that courts may oversee and nullify the actions of another the actions of another branch of governmentbranch of government). ).

�� The landmark decision helped define the "The landmark decision helped define the "checks checks and balancesand balances" of the " of the American form of American form of governmentgovernment..

Landmark CasesLandmark Cases

�� DredDred Scott v. Scott v. SandfordSandfordwas a decision by the was a decision by the United States Supreme United States Supreme CourtCourt that ruled that that ruled that people of African descent people of African descent imported into the United imported into the United States and held as States and held as slavesslaves, , States and held as States and held as slavesslaves, , or their descendants or their descendants ——whether or not they were whether or not they were slaves slaves —— were not were not protected by the protected by the Constitution and could Constitution and could never be never be citizenscitizens of the of the United StatesUnited States. .

�� It also held that the It also held that the United States CongressUnited States Congress had had no authority to prohibit no authority to prohibit slaveryslavery in federal in federal territoriesterritories..

�� The Court also ruled that because slaves were The Court also ruled that because slaves were not citizens, they not citizens, they could not suecould not sue in court. in court. not citizens, they not citizens, they could not suecould not sue in court. in court.

�� Lastly, the Court ruled that slaves Lastly, the Court ruled that slaves —— as private as private property property —— could not be taken away from their could not be taken away from their owners without due process. owners without due process.

�� The The SlaughterSlaughter--House CasesHouse Cases, (1873) was the , (1873) was the first first United States Supreme CourtUnited States Supreme Court interpretation interpretation of the relatively new of the relatively new Fourteenth AmendmentFourteenth Amendment to to the the ConstitutionConstitution..

�� It is viewed as a pivotal case in early It is viewed as a pivotal case in early civil rightscivil rights�� It is viewed as a pivotal case in early It is viewed as a pivotal case in early civil rightscivil rightslaw, reading the Fourteenth Amendment as law, reading the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the "privileges or immunities" protecting the "privileges or immunities" conferred by virtue of the U.S. citizenship to all conferred by virtue of the U.S. citizenship to all individuals of all states within it.individuals of all states within it.

�� It, the 14It, the 14thth Amendment, partially overturned the Amendment, partially overturned the DredDred Scott decision.Scott decision.

�� PlessyPlessy v. Fergusonv. Ferguson, , (1896), upheld the (1896), upheld the constitutionalityconstitutionality of of racial racial segregationsegregation even in even in public accommodations public accommodations (particularly railroads), (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of under the doctrine of under the doctrine of under the doctrine of ""separate but equalseparate but equal". ".

�� "Separate but equal" "Separate but equal" remained standard remained standard doctrine in U.S. law until doctrine in U.S. law until it was overturned with it was overturned with Brown v. Board of Brown v. Board of Education of TopekaEducation of Topekain 1954. in 1954.

�� Brown v. Board of Education Brown v. Board of Education of Topekaof Topeka, (1954), overturned , (1954), overturned earlier rulings going back to earlier rulings going back to PlessyPlessy v. Fergusonv. Ferguson in 1896, by in 1896, by declaring that state laws that declaring that state laws that established separate established separate public public schoolsschools for black and white for black and white students denied black children students denied black children students denied black children students denied black children equal educational opportunities. equal educational opportunities.

�� As a result, As a result, de jurede jure racial racial segregationsegregation was ruled a was ruled a violation of the violation of the Equal Equal Protection ClauseProtection Clause of the of the Fourteenth AmendmentFourteenth Amendment of the of the United States ConstitutionUnited States Constitution..

�� This victory paved the way for This victory paved the way for integrationintegration and the and the civil rights civil rights movementmovement..

Lower Federal CourtsLower Federal Courts

�� The Constitution created The Constitution created

the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court and

allowed for Congress to allowed for Congress to

establish a network of establish a network of

lower federal courts as lower federal courts as lower federal courts as lower federal courts as

well. These courts are of well. These courts are of

2 basic types: 2 basic types:

constitutional federal constitutional federal

courts and legislative courts and legislative

federal courts.federal courts.

�� The The United StatesUnited States Judiciary Act Judiciary Act of 1789 was a landmark of 1789 was a landmark statutestatuteadopted on September 24, adopted on September 24, 17891789in the first session of the in the first session of the First First United States CongressUnited States Congressestablishing the establishing the U.S. federal U.S. federal judiciaryjudiciary..judiciaryjudiciary..

�� Article III, section 1 of the Article III, section 1 of the ConstitutionConstitution prescribed that the prescribed that the "judicial power of the United "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court", and such Supreme Court", and such inferior courts as Congress saw inferior courts as Congress saw fit to establish. fit to establish.

Constitutional CourtsConstitutional Courts

�� Courts established by Congress under the Courts established by Congress under the provisions of Article III of the Constitution are provisions of Article III of the Constitution are constitutional courts. constitutional courts.

�� These courts include:These courts include:�� These courts include:These courts include:

�� federal district courts, federal district courts,

�� the federal courts of appealsthe federal courts of appeals

�� the U.S. Court of International Tradethe U.S. Court of International Trade

Federal District CourtsFederal District Courts

�� Congress created district courts in 1789 to serve as trial Congress created district courts in 1789 to serve as trial

courts. As population grew and cases multiplied, courts. As population grew and cases multiplied,

Congress divided some states into more than one Congress divided some states into more than one

district.district.

�� There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least

one district in each state, the District of Columbia and one district in each state, the District of Columbia and

Puerto Rico. Three territories of the United States Puerto Rico. Three territories of the United States ----

the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana

Islands Islands ---- have district courts that hear federal cases, have district courts that hear federal cases,

including bankruptcy cases including bankruptcy cases

Federal District CourtsFederal District Courts

�� The district courts have The district courts have

jurisdiction to hear nearly jurisdiction to hear nearly

all categories of federal all categories of federal

cases, including both civil cases, including both civil

and criminal matters. and criminal matters. and criminal matters. and criminal matters.

Every day hundreds of Every day hundreds of

people across the nation people across the nation

are selected for are selected for jury dutyjury duty

and help decide some of and help decide some of

these cases these cases

JuriesJuries�� Federal courts use 2 types of Federal courts use 2 types of

juries: grand jury and trial juries: grand jury and trial jury.jury.

�� Grand juryGrand jury has 16 has 16 –– 23 23 people and hears evidence people and hears evidence against the accused. If they against the accused. If they think there is enough think there is enough think there is enough think there is enough evidence, they pass an evidence, they pass an indictmentindictment –– a formal a formal accusation charging the accusation charging the person with a crime.person with a crime.

�� The The trial jurytrial jury /petit jury has /petit jury has 6 6 –– 12 people. They find the 12 people. They find the accused guilty or innocent. accused guilty or innocent. In some states, they pass In some states, they pass sentence on the convicted.sentence on the convicted.

�� The 94 U.S. judicial districts The 94 U.S. judicial districts are organized into 12 regional are organized into 12 regional circuits, each of which has a circuits, each of which has a United States court of United States court of appeals.appeals.

�� A court of appeals hears A court of appeals hears �� A court of appeals hears A court of appeals hears appeals from the district appeals from the district courts located within its courts located within its circuit, as well as appeals circuit, as well as appeals from decisions of federal from decisions of federal administrative agencies. administrative agencies.

Court of AppealsCourt of Appeals

�� Courts of appeals have only appellate Courts of appeals have only appellate jurisdiction. Most appeals arise from decisions jurisdiction. Most appeals arise from decisions of district courts, the U.S. Tax Court and various of district courts, the U.S. Tax Court and various territorial courts. These courts also hear appeals territorial courts. These courts also hear appeals territorial courts. These courts also hear appeals territorial courts. These courts also hear appeals on the rulings of regulatory agencies such as the on the rulings of regulatory agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission or the Federal Federal Trade Commission or the Federal Communications Commission.Communications Commission.

�� Courts of appeals may decide Courts of appeals may decide

an appeal in one of 3 ways:an appeal in one of 3 ways:

�� Uphold the original decisionUphold the original decision

�� Reverse that decisionReverse that decision

�� Or send it back to the lower Or send it back to the lower

court to be tried again.court to be tried again.

�� Unless appealed to the Unless appealed to the

Supreme Court, the appeals Supreme Court, the appeals

court decision is final.court decision is final.

�� A special court of appeals A special court of appeals called the called the United States United States Court of Appeals for the Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitFederal Circuit was created was created by by CongressCongress with passage of with passage of the Federal Courts the Federal Courts the Federal Courts the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 Improvement Act of 1982 making the judges of the making the judges of the former courts into circuit former courts into circuit judges.judges.

�� It is housed in Washington, It is housed in Washington, D.C. D.C.

�� The The United States Court of United States Court of Federal ClaimsFederal Claims hears nonhears non--tort monetary claims against tort monetary claims against the the U.S. governmentU.S. government. .

�� It hears claims for money It hears claims for money that arise from the that arise from the United United that arise from the that arise from the United United States ConstitutionStates Constitution, , federal federal statutesstatutes, executive , executive regulations, or an express or regulations, or an express or implied contractimplied contract with the with the United States Government.United States Government.

�� The The United States Tax CourtUnited States Tax Courtspecializes in adjudicating disputes specializes in adjudicating disputes over over federal income taxfederal income tax, generally , generally prior to the time at which the prior to the time at which the formal tax assessments are made by formal tax assessments are made by the the Internal Revenue ServiceInternal Revenue Service..

�� The Tax Court is the only forum in The Tax Court is the only forum in which taxpayers outside of which taxpayers outside of which taxpayers outside of which taxpayers outside of bankruptcybankruptcy may do so without may do so without having first paid the disputed tax in having first paid the disputed tax in full. full.

�� The The United States Court of United States Court of Appeals for the Armed ForcesAppeals for the Armed Forcesexercises worldwide exercises worldwide appellate appellate jurisdictionjurisdiction over members of the over members of the United States armed forcesUnited States armed forces on on active dutyactive duty and other persons and other persons subject to the subject to the Uniform Code of Uniform Code of Military JusticeMilitary Justice. .

�� The court is composed of five The court is composed of five civilian judges appointed for 15civilian judges appointed for 15--year terms by the year terms by the President of the President of the United StatesUnited States with the advice and with the advice and consent of the consent of the United States United States SenateSenate. .

Selection of Federal JudgesSelection of Federal Judges

�� Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution provides Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution provides that the president, with consent of the Senate, that the president, with consent of the Senate, appoints all federal judges. appoints all federal judges.

�� Judges in constitutional courts are appointed to Judges in constitutional courts are appointed to �� Judges in constitutional courts are appointed to Judges in constitutional courts are appointed to serve for life. serve for life.

�� What advantages/disadvantages (political) would What advantages/disadvantages (political) would there be for a judge to be appointed for life?there be for a judge to be appointed for life?

Party Affiliation/Political PhilosophyParty Affiliation/Political Philosophy

�� Presidents favor judges who Presidents favor judges who

belong to their own political belong to their own political

party. party.

�� Because judges are appointed Because judges are appointed

for life, presidents view the for life, presidents view the

�� Senatorial courtesy allows Senatorial courtesy allows

that the president submit the that the president submit the

name of the judicial name of the judicial

candidate to the senators candidate to the senators

from the candidate’s state from the candidate’s state for life, presidents view the for life, presidents view the

appointments are a way to appointments are a way to

ensure their political ideas ensure their political ideas

will continue even after they will continue even after they

leave office.leave office.

from the candidate’s state from the candidate’s state

before submitting to the before submitting to the

entire Senate for approval. If entire Senate for approval. If

either or both senators either or both senators

oppose the nominee, the oppose the nominee, the

president usually withdraws president usually withdraws

that nomination. that nomination.

The Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court

�� The The Supreme Court of the United Supreme Court of the United StatesStates is the highest judicial body in is the highest judicial body in the the United StatesUnited States..

�� It consists of the It consists of the Chief Justice of the Chief Justice of the United StatesUnited States and eight and eight Associate Associate JusticesJustices, who are nominated by the , who are nominated by the PresidentPresident and confirmed with the of and confirmed with the of the the SenateSenate..the the SenateSenate..

�� Once appointed, Justices effectively Once appointed, Justices effectively have life tenure, serving "during good have life tenure, serving "during good Behavior“, which terminates only upon Behavior“, which terminates only upon death, resignation, retirement, or death, resignation, retirement, or conviction on conviction on impeachmentimpeachment..

�� The Court meets in The Court meets in Washington, D.C.Washington, D.C.in the in the United States Supreme Court United States Supreme Court buildingbuilding. The Supreme Court is . The Supreme Court is primarily an primarily an appellate courtappellate court, but it has , but it has original jurisdictionoriginal jurisdiction over a small range over a small range of cases of cases

How do they decide which cases to How do they decide which cases to

hear?hear?�� The Supreme Court decides The Supreme Court decides

to hear a case on three major to hear a case on three major factors. Whether it was an factors. Whether it was an appeal by the federal court appeal by the federal court and is in conflict with the and is in conflict with the decisions of other circuits, decisions of other circuits, decisions of other circuits, decisions of other circuits, the general importance of the the general importance of the case, and whether the lower case, and whether the lower court's decisions may be court's decisions may be wrong in light of the wrong in light of the Supreme Court's opinions.Supreme Court's opinions.

�� A petition for a writ of A petition for a writ of certiorari is the certiorari is the documentation sent to the documentation sent to the Supreme Court of the United Supreme Court of the United States to request that they States to request that they review a case. review a case.

�� A writ of certiorari ("to be A writ of certiorari ("to be informed") is issued from any informed") is issued from any informed") is issued from any informed") is issued from any appellate court (the Supreme appellate court (the Supreme Court is the highest appellate Court is the highest appellate court) to a lower court court) to a lower court requesting more information requesting more information about a case about a case -- seeking judicial seeking judicial review.review.

How do they decide a case?How do they decide a case?�� Once the Supreme Court accepts Once the Supreme Court accepts

a case, the lawyers give the Court a case, the lawyers give the Court lengthy, detailed documents lengthy, detailed documents called "briefs" called "briefs" –– arguing their arguing their points and providing legal points and providing legal support for them.support for them.

Next, the attorneys typically Next, the attorneys typically �� Next, the attorneys typically Next, the attorneys typically argue the merits of their cases argue the merits of their cases orally before the Supreme Court orally before the Supreme Court (which the public is welcome to (which the public is welcome to attend). The Court considers attend). The Court considers these these briefs and argumentsbriefs and arguments in in researching and deciding the researching and deciding the cases.cases.

The ConferenceThe Conference

�� After the lawyers complete their oral arguments, After the lawyers complete their oral arguments, the justices debate the case. the justices debate the case.

�� Usually about 30 minutes per case then they Usually about 30 minutes per case then they vote. A majority of the justices must be in vote. A majority of the justices must be in vote. A majority of the justices must be in vote. A majority of the justices must be in agreement. agreement.

The OpinionThe Opinion

�� The opinion states the facts of the case.The opinion states the facts of the case.

�� The opinions are as important as the decision The opinions are as important as the decision itself. They set a precedent for the lower courts itself. They set a precedent for the lower courts to follow in future cases and gives the public an to follow in future cases and gives the public an to follow in future cases and gives the public an to follow in future cases and gives the public an explanation for their decision. explanation for their decision.

�� There are 4 different opinions:There are 4 different opinions:

�� Unanimous, majority, concurring, and dissentingUnanimous, majority, concurring, and dissenting

OpinionsOpinions

�� Unanimous: all justices vote the same way (only Unanimous: all justices vote the same way (only about 1/3 of the decisions are unanimous)about 1/3 of the decisions are unanimous)

�� Majority: expresses the views of a majority of Majority: expresses the views of a majority of the justicesthe justicesthe justicesthe justices

�� Concurring: one or more of the justices agree Concurring: one or more of the justices agree with the majority’s conclusions on the case, but with the majority’s conclusions on the case, but for different reasonsfor different reasons

�� Dissenting: opinion of the justices on the losing Dissenting: opinion of the justices on the losing side.side.

Judicial ActivismJudicial Activism

�� The philosophy of The philosophy of judicial activismjudicial activism is the is the charge that judges are going beyond their charge that judges are going beyond their appropriate powers and engaging in making law appropriate powers and engaging in making law and not merely interpreting it.and not merely interpreting it.

�� Judicial activismJudicial activism is a critical term used by is a critical term used by some to describe some to describe judicialjudicial rulings that they feel rulings that they feel are based more upon the judge's personal bias are based more upon the judge's personal bias than by existing law.than by existing law.

Judicial RestraintJudicial Restraint

�� Judicial restraintJudicial restraint encourages encourages judgesjudges to limit the to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional. they are obviously unconstitutional.