JUSTICE FOR ALL?How Cases Reach the U.S. Supreme Court
The Supreme Court
The highest court in the judicial branch of the U.S. gov’t
The court of last resort in civil and criminal cases
The Nine Justices
One Chief Justice Eight associate
justices Appointed by the
president With the advice and
consent of the Senate
Serve during good behavior until death, retirement, or resignation
U.S.
Canada
Judicial Review
Judicial review empowers the Court to: Interpret the Constitution and invalidate laws
violating the Constitution Interpret federal statutes and other federal law Ensure the supremacy of federal laws over state
and local laws
Legal Influences
The Constraints of the Facts The circumstances of a
litigation Cannot rule unless the
parties bring an actual case The Constraints of the
Law Which laws are relevant Interpretation of the
Constitution Interpretation of statutes Interpretation of precedent
Political Influences
Outside Influences Public opinion Interest groups Public officials
Inside Influences Personal beliefs Political attitudes Relationships between
justices
Appeals from Federal Courts
Getting Your Day in Court
Requests for review per year: ~9000
Decisions per year: ~80
Cases can reach the Supreme Court in three ways.
Denied99%
Granted1%
Certiori Petitions Granted
Granted (1%)
Not Granted (99%)
Supreme Court Review
Path #1: Original Jurisdiction
Cases that only the Supreme Court is empowered to hear
Don’t require appeal Example: disputes
between states over boundaries
Relatively rare (1-2 per Term)
Path #2: Appeal from Federal Court
Cases on appeal from lower federal courts
The Court is required to hear some cases as a matter of law.
However, it can choose to hear most cases as a matter of discretion. By granting or refusing a
writ of certiorari Granting the writ
requires four justices to vote to hear case
Path #3: Appeal from State Court
Cases on appeal from state supreme courts that present a substantial federal question
Usually involving the denial of constitutional rights
Review is discretionary
Process
Justices grant certiorari
Parties submit briefs
Others who are not involved in the case but have an interest in the outcome submit amicus briefs
Oral arguments Opinions
Oral Arguments
Give-and-take between the lawyers and the Justices
Helps identify issues that weren’t properly briefed
Magnifies the strengths and weaknesses of each side's arguments
Lets Justices ask hypothetical questions to gauge likely effects
Allows the public and media to hear judicial proceedings
Blah!
Opinions
Very long, extensively footnoted documents that serve as a record of the decisions
Written with help of Justices’ law clerks
Four main types Majority Concurring Dissenting Per curiam
Lockyer v. Andrade
Under California’s three strikes law, a court sentenced Andrade to life in prison for shoplifting. Did this violate 8th Amendment prohibition on cruel & unusual punishment?
Andrade
Chemerinsky (Lawyer)
Lockyer: Holding
No. Without any clearly established law to define a three-strikes policy as cruel and unusual punishment, Andrade’s sentence didn’t violate the 8th Amendment.
Sources on Lockyer v. Andrade http://
supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/docket/2002/november.html (lower court decisions and briefs)
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2002/2002_01_1127 (audio recording and transcript of oral argument)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-1127.ZS.html (Supreme Court opinions)
Morse v. Frederick
An Alaska high school principal disciplined a student for displaying a banner saying “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” at a school-sponsored event. Did this violate First Amendment protection for freedom of speech?
Morse: Holding
No. Without violating the First Amendment, educators could suppress student speech at school-supervised events on the grounds that the speech was reasonably viewed as promoting use of illegal drugs.
Morse: Appeal
Oral Argument
Student Protest
Mertz (Lawyer)
Morse v. Frederick raised questions about the balance between the right to speech versus the need for order. Some students had very strong opinions on where to draw the line.
Morse: Conclusion
Morse v. Frederick eventually settled for $45,000. Last we heard, Frederick was abroad teaching English (but not constitutional law) in China. Meanwhile, “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” became a popular T-shirt slogan.
Sources on Morse v. Frederick http://
www.aclu.org/free-speech/morse-v-frederick (Supreme Court briefs)
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2006/2006_06_278 (audio recording and transcript of oral argument)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/06-278.ZS.html (Supreme Court opinion)
Safford Unified School Dist. v. Redding
Arizona school officials strip-searched a 13-year-old girl accused of giving her classmate some Ibuprofen. Did this violate Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches?
Redding, her mom, and her attorney
YouTube video: http://rubroadcastnewswriting.wordpress.com/2009/06/
Savana Redding
Safford: Holding
Yes. The strip search violated the Fourth Amendment because the officials lacked reasons to suspect that the Ibuprofen was a danger or that it was concealed in her underwear.
Sources on Safford v. Redding http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cas
es/safford-united-school-district-1-v-redding/ (lower court decisions and briefs)
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2008/2008_08_479 (oral argument transcript and audio recording)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-479.ZS.html (Supreme Court opinion)
Select Sources
http://www.catea.gatech.edu/grade/legal/scotus.html
http://www2.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/court.html
This presentation is adjourned.