The Judicial Branch The Role of the Judicial Branch To interpret and define law To interpret and define law This involves hearing individual cases and

The Judicial The Judicial BranchBranch

The Role of the Judicial BranchThe Role of the Judicial Branch

To interpret and define lawTo interpret and define law This involves hearing This involves hearing

individual cases and deciding individual cases and deciding how the law should applyhow the law should apply

Remember Remember federalismfederalism – – there are federal courts for there are federal courts for federal law, and state courts federal law, and state courts for state laws!for state laws!

Where Do the Courts’ Jurisdiction Where Do the Courts’ Jurisdiction Come From?Come From?

Article III of the US Constitution Article III of the US Constitution creates “one Supreme Court, creates “one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts” that and such inferior courts” that Congress createsCongress creates

Thus, Congress creates the Thus, Congress creates the system underneath Supreme system underneath Supreme CourtCourt

State CourtsState Courts

Special courts Special courts (have only limited jurisdiction)(have only limited jurisdiction)

Divorce CourtDivorce Court

Probate CourtProbate Court

Small Claims CourtSmall Claims Court

Family CourtFamily Court

Traffic Court Traffic Court

District Courts- District Courts- jurisdiction over cases jurisdiction over cases involving misdemeanors crimesinvolving misdemeanors crimes

Superior Courts- Superior Courts- jurisdiction over cases jurisdiction over cases involving felony crimesinvolving felony crimes

State CourtsState Courts

State Appeals Courts- State Appeals Courts- hears cases hears cases on appeal from Superior Courtson appeal from Superior Courts

State Supreme Court- State Supreme Court- highest highest appeals court for State lawsappeals court for State laws

3 Major Steps in the Federal 3 Major Steps in the Federal Court SystemCourt System

District Courts

Court of Appeals

Supreme Court

94 1

12 3

1 9

Courts Judges

JurisdictionJurisdiction

Jurisdiction – the authority of Jurisdiction – the authority of a court to hear (try and a court to hear (try and decide on) a casedecide on) a case

4 Types of Jurisdiction:4 Types of Jurisdiction:Exclusive Jurisdiction – only Exclusive Jurisdiction – only federal court has authority federal court has authority to hear, state court cannotto hear, state court cannot


Concurrent Jurisdiction – federal Concurrent Jurisdiction – federal or state court could hearor state court could hear

Original Jurisdiction – court is the Original Jurisdiction – court is the first one to hear a casefirst one to hear a case

Appellate Jurisdiction – court can Appellate Jurisdiction – court can only hear a case on appealonly hear a case on appeal


U.S. District Courts have U.S. District Courts have original jurisdictionoriginal jurisdiction

The Court of Appeals has The Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdictionappellate jurisdiction

Supreme Court has bothSupreme Court has both

SUPREME COURTSUPREME COURT

Original jurisdiction in which cases?Original jurisdiction in which cases?

Constitutionally speaking:Constitutionally speaking: cases affecting ambassadors and other cases affecting ambassadors and other

diplomatsdiplomats cases in which a state is a party cases in which a state is a party (either as (either as

plaintiff or defendant)plaintiff or defendant)

In actual practiceIn actual practice, only cases involving , only cases involving disputes between two or more states are heard disputes between two or more states are heard originally by the US Supreme Courtoriginally by the US Supreme Court

Appointment of JudgesAppointment of Judges

Only President can Only President can nominate someone nominate someone to be a federal to be a federal judgejudge

Senate majority Senate majority vote required to vote required to confirmconfirm

Judges serve for Judges serve for lifelife

Why Life Terms?Why Life Terms?

Founding Fathers wanted an Founding Fathers wanted an independent judiciaryindependent judiciary

They did not want judges to be They did not want judges to be influenced by election or votesinfluenced by election or votes

Judges can only be removed by Judges can only be removed by Congressional impeachmentCongressional impeachment

District CourtDistrict Court

Federal District Court is the Federal District Court is the principal trial court in the system principal trial court in the system (1(1stst trial for the vast majority of federal trial for the vast majority of federal cases)cases)

94 Districts divided geographically94 Districts divided geographically Hears both criminal and civil casesHears both criminal and civil cases

Process of a Criminal CaseProcess of a Criminal Case U.S. attorney gathers up all U.S. attorney gathers up all

the evidence against accusedthe evidence against accused Presents it to a Presents it to a grand jurygrand jury, 16 , 16

to 23 people who decide to 23 people who decide whether there is enough whether there is enough evidence to indict evidence to indict

If they vote to If they vote to indictindict , trial , trial begins with a new jurybegins with a new jury

Process of a Criminal CaseProcess of a Criminal Case If you lose your trial, you have the If you lose your trial, you have the

option to appeal to a higher courtoption to appeal to a higher court The higher court does not have to The higher court does not have to

hear your case, they will only take hear your case, they will only take it if there is a significant problem it if there is a significant problem with the lower court decisionwith the lower court decision

Higher courts have the option to Higher courts have the option to overturn or modify lower court overturn or modify lower court decisionsdecisions

Appeals CourtsAppeals Courts

Person found guilty in Federal District Person found guilty in Federal District court would appeal decision to Federal court would appeal decision to Federal Appeals CourtAppeals Court

Appeals Court has just 1 judgeAppeals Court has just 1 judge Only decides if there were any Only decides if there were any

mistakes or misinterpretations of law mistakes or misinterpretations of law in 1in 1stst trial trial

Supreme CourtSupreme Court

The “Court of The “Court of Last Resort” – Last Resort” – highest court highest court in the countryin the country

Has power of Has power of judicial reviewjudicial review

Judicial ReviewJudicial Review

Judicial Review – the power to Judicial Review – the power to declare laws or gov’t actions declare laws or gov’t actions unconstitutionalunconstitutional

All comes from the case of All comes from the case of Marbury v. Madison Marbury v. Madison – it set – it set precedent for judicial reviewprecedent for judicial review

Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison

Adams has just lost to Jefferson Adams has just lost to Jefferson in the election of 1800in the election of 1800

To protect his party, Adams To protect his party, Adams appointed Federalists to loads of appointed Federalists to loads of new judgeshipsnew judgeships

These late appointments known These late appointments known as “the midnight judges”as “the midnight judges”

Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison Jefferson was angryJefferson was angry He ordered Madison He ordered Madison

(Sec. of State) (Sec. of State) not to not to deliver deliver commissionscommissions

Marbury, who was Marbury, who was one of the midnight one of the midnight judges, sued judges, sued Madison to get his Madison to get his commissioncommission

Decision in Decision in Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison

Judiciary Act of 1789 gave Judiciary Act of 1789 gave Supreme Court Supreme Court originaloriginal jurisdiction in disputes about jurisdiction in disputes about judgeshipsjudgeships

Article III of Constitution only Article III of Constitution only gives Supreme Court gives Supreme Court appellateappellate jurisdiction in those casesjurisdiction in those cases

Decision in Decision in Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison

Therefore, Judiciary Act of 1789 Therefore, Judiciary Act of 1789 was ruled to bewas ruled to be

11stst time Supreme Court struck time Supreme Court struck down a law as unconstitutional- down a law as unconstitutional- established the precedent for established the precedent for judicial reviewjudicial review

John MarshallJohn Marshall Chief Justice during Chief Justice during Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison Was one of the Federalist judges Was one of the Federalist judges

appointed by Adams late in his termappointed by Adams late in his term Marshall wanted to establish more Marshall wanted to establish more

power for the Federal judiciarypower for the Federal judiciary It was his idea to declare theIt was his idea to declare the

Judiciary Act unconstitutionalJudiciary Act unconstitutional

He strengthened the He strengthened the

Supreme CourtSupreme Court

Trial Process at Supreme CourtTrial Process at Supreme Court

Trial does not function like Trial does not function like principal trial courtsprincipal trial courts No “evidence” presented, or No “evidence” presented, or

witnesses questioned, etc.witnesses questioned, etc. Rather, one attorney for each Rather, one attorney for each

side presents his arguments side presents his arguments for 30 minutes, while being for 30 minutes, while being questioned by justicesquestioned by justices

Trial Process at Supreme CourtTrial Process at Supreme Court Once arguments are over, justices Once arguments are over, justices

will write will write opinionsopinions on the case, and on the case, and each justice chooses which opinion each justice chooses which opinion to sign his/her name toto sign his/her name to Majority Opinion – final decision Majority Opinion – final decision

on the case, signed by at least 5 on the case, signed by at least 5 justicesjusticesBecomes Becomes precedentprecedent for how future for how future similar cases should be decidedsimilar cases should be decided

Trial Process at Supreme CourtTrial Process at Supreme CourtDissenting Opinion – written Dissenting Opinion – written or signed by any justice who or signed by any justice who disagrees with the majoritydisagrees with the majorityIt’s important because it can It’s important because it can become the logic for a future become the logic for a future group of justices to overturn group of justices to overturn this decisionthis decision

Trial Process at Supreme CourtTrial Process at Supreme CourtConcurring Opinion – written Concurring Opinion – written by a justice who votes with by a justice who votes with the majority, but disagrees the majority, but disagrees with their reasoning as to with their reasoning as to whywhy

If a justice has a conflict of If a justice has a conflict of interest in a case, he/she interest in a case, he/she may may recuserecuse himself himself (stay off (stay off of the case)of the case)

Important Historical CasesImportant Historical Cases Marbury v. Madison (1804) Marbury v. Madison (1804) –– established established

precedent of judicial reviewprecedent of judicial review

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) – – people of people of African descent imported into the U.S. were African descent imported into the U.S. were not and could never be considered citizensnot and could never be considered citizens

Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) –– said said segregation was constitutional as long as both segregation was constitutional as long as both races had equal facilities races had equal facilities (separate but equal)(separate but equal)

Brown v. Board of Education (1954) – overturned Brown v. Board of Education (1954) – overturned Plessy decision on the grounds that segregation Plessy decision on the grounds that segregation violated the 14th Amendmentviolated the 14th Amendment

Important Historical CasesImportant Historical Cases Mapp v. Ohio (1961)- Mapp v. Ohio (1961)- ruled that materials or info ruled that materials or info

gained from an illegal search by police cannot be gained from an illegal search by police cannot be used as evidence against the accused in the trialused as evidence against the accused in the trial

Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)- Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)- ruled that all ruled that all defendants had right to attorney, even if poor defendants had right to attorney, even if poor

Miranda v. Arizona (1966)- Miranda v. Arizona (1966)- ruled that accused ruled that accused had to be read their 5had to be read their 5thth Amendment rights before Amendment rights before questioningquestioning

Roe v. Wade (1973)- Roe v. Wade (1973)- ruled that states could NOT ruled that states could NOT prohibit women from having legal abortionsprohibit women from having legal abortions

Texas v. Johnson (1989)- Texas v. Johnson (1989)- ruled that states could ruled that states could not make laws preventing the burning of the US flagnot make laws preventing the burning of the US flag

Important Cases of Student RightsImportant Cases of Student Rights Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) ruled ruled

wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under the First Amendment, even on public school grounds.the First Amendment, even on public school grounds.

New Jersey v. T. L. O. New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985)- (1985)- ruled 4ruled 4thth Amendment Amendment ban on unreasonable searches applies to those conducted ban on unreasonable searches applies to those conducted by public school officials as well as those conducted by law by public school officials as well as those conducted by law enforcement personnel, but schools can use the less strict enforcement personnel, but schools can use the less strict standard of “reasonable suspicion” rather than “probable standard of “reasonable suspicion” rather than “probable cause”cause”

Ingraham v. Wright (1977) Ingraham v. Wright (1977) - that reasonable - that reasonable physical discipline at school doesn't violate the physical discipline at school doesn't violate the Constitution. Court said 8Constitution. Court said 8thth Amendment was designed to Amendment was designed to protect convicted criminals from excessive punishment at protect convicted criminals from excessive punishment at the hands of the government—not schoolchildren who the hands of the government—not schoolchildren who misbehave.misbehave.

Important Cases of Student RightsImportant Cases of Student Rights Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1987)- Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1987)- ruled ruled

students cannot use 1students cannot use 1stst Amendment “free speech” clause to Amendment “free speech” clause to defend use of profane and/or obscene language at schooldefend use of profane and/or obscene language at school

Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) - - Public school Public school student newspapers that have not been established as student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) as forums for student expression. Censorship of school as forums for student expression. Censorship of school paper is allowedpaper is allowed

Roper v. Simmons (2005)Roper v. Simmons (2005) – Court ruled that use of – Court ruled that use of death penalty for convicted suspects younger than age 18 death penalty for convicted suspects younger than age 18 violates 8violates 8thth Amendment Amendment (cruel & unusual punishment). (cruel & unusual punishment). Expanded Expanded upon 1988 Supreme Court ruling that executions of younger upon 1988 Supreme Court ruling that executions of younger than 15 yrs old unconstitutional than 15 yrs old unconstitutional (Thompson v. Oklahoma)(Thompson v. Oklahoma)

Can you name 3 current Can you name 3 current Supreme Court justices?Supreme Court justices?

Who is the current Chief Justice of US?Who is the current Chief Justice of US?

How many S.C. justices has O’Bama How many S.C. justices has O’Bama appointed?appointed?

Current Supreme Court JusticesCurrent Supreme Court Justices

Chief Justice Chief Justice John RobertsJohn Roberts

Appointed: Appointed: Bush, 2005Bush, 2005

Age: 55Age: 55 ConservativeConservative


Antonin ScaliaAntonin Scalia Appointed: Appointed:

Reagan, 1986Reagan, 1986 Age: 74Age: 74 Strong Strong

ConservativeConservative


Anthony Anthony KennedyKennedy

Appointed: Appointed: Reagan, 1988Reagan, 1988

Age: 73Age: 73 Swing Vote Swing Vote

(Usually (Usually Conservative)Conservative)


Clarence Clarence ThomasThomas

Appointed: Appointed: Bush, 1991Bush, 1991

Age: 61Age: 61 Strong Strong

ConservativeConservative


Ruth Bader Ruth Bader GinsburgGinsburg

Appointed: Appointed: Clinton, 1993Clinton, 1993

Age: 77Age: 77 Strong LiberalStrong Liberal


Stephen Stephen BreyerBreyer

Appointed: Appointed: Clinton, 1994Clinton, 1994

Age: 71Age: 71 LiberalLiberal


Samuel AlitoSamuel Alito Appointed: Appointed:

Bush, 2006Bush, 2006 Age: 60Age: 60 ConservativeConservative


Sonia Sonia SotomayorSotomayor

Appointed: Appointed: Obama, 2009Obama, 2009

Age: 55Age: 55 Strong Strong

LiberalLiberal


Elena KaganElena Kagan Appointed: Appointed:

Obama, 2010Obama, 2010 Age: 50Age: 50 LiberalLiberal

Documents

The Judicial Branch The Role of the Judicial Branch To interpret and define law To interpret and define law This involves hearing individual cases and