Chapters 13-14: The Judicial Branch Unit 3

The Judicial System in Our Democracy

Rule of Law and Judicial Review No individual, group, organization, or governmental entity is above the law All must be held accountable if they violate it Laws must be clear and must be equally enforced The job of the courts is to promote the rule of law Judicial Review Power of the SC to declare laws and actions of local, state, or national governments unconstitutional Courts must act impartially and make fair decisions without influence by outside forces.

Trials

The Function of Trial Courts and Jurisdiction Criminal trial court—hears cases about crimes like burglary, murder, or DUI Civil trial court—hears cases where one person/group thinks another person/group should pay for causing harm Original jurisdiction—authority of a trial court to be the first to hear a case

The Trial Process Listen to testimony, consider evidence, decide the facts in situations Roles in a trial: Plaintiff/Victim Defendant Prosecutor Public defender/Defense Attorney Jury

Appeals

Types of Cases That Are Appealed Errors of Law—A mistake by a judge as to the applicable law in a case Appellate courts don’t reconsider facts of a case (testimony of witnesses, evidence, etc.); instead they focus on deciding legal questions that arise in a trial. Procedural Due Process—the fair administration of justice

Procedures of an Appeals Court Party presents arguments asking court to review the decision of the trial court. The other party presents arguments supporting the original decision No juries/witnesses, no new evidence. Only lawyers Panel of judges/justices decide appeals 3 options/decisions: Uphold the original decision Reverse the original decision Send the case back to the lower court to be tried again Judges/justices write opinions Majority opinion Dissenting opinion Concurring opinion

Precedent and Stare Decisis Precedent—a legal principle created by an appellate court decision that lower court judges must follow when deciding similar cases Stare decisis—”Let the decision stand”; refers to the principle that courts should follow precedent

Local, State, and Federal Courts

State and Local Courts State Trial and Appeals Courts Minor courts/justice courts/municipal courts/magistrate courts/inferior trial courts—dal with specific types of legal issues Ex: family court deals only with issues of family law; traffic court deals just with transportation issues General trial courts/superior court/county court/district court—wide range of cases (criminal and civil) You may appeal to an intermediate court of appeals/supreme court/court of appeals/supreme judicial court

Judges Around 30,000 judges State court judges are selected in 4 different ways: Popular election Election by the legislature Appointment by governor Or a combination of appointment and popular election Serve a limited term but can be reelected/reappointed

Federal Courts Federal Trials and Appeals Courts U.S. has 94 federal judicial districts 1 federal district court in each one, handles criminal and civil cases Federal bankruptcy and tax courts Trial courts are groups into 12 regional circuits Each one has a federal court of appeals (U.S. Circuit Court)

Judges About 850 federal judges Federal court judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate Typically serve until they resign, retire, or die Removal must go through Congress

Selecting Cases at the Supreme Court

The Function of the Supreme Court Primary: To resolve disputes that arise over the meaning of federal law and the Constitution Wants to make sure that federal law is uniform across the country Judicial review—power the Court has to examine the laws and actions of local, state, and national governments and to overturn them when necessary Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Choosing Cases Jurisdiction Cases involving representatives of foreign governments Certain cases in which a state is a party Could be between states, states vs. federal government, or individual/group against a state/federal government What does the Court look for? May choose cases where lower courts have decided the same issue in different ways Mostly concerned about ensuring uniformity in decisions about the meaning of the Constitution and the interpretation of federal laws Looking for cases of national impact If at least 4 of the 9 justices agree to hear a case, the case will be scheduled for argument

Deciding Cases

Arguing and Deciding Cases Briefing Each side submits a brief explaining how they want the Court to decide their case and why Provide argument supporting their side Typically points out similar cases that have already ruled in their favor Amicus curiae—”friend of the court”; written brief from an individual/group claiming to have information useful to court’s consideration of a case Typically experts in the field Oral Argument Hour long, open to public Each side gets time to present Justices ask questions

Arguing and Deciding Cases Deciding the Case Justices meet in conference to discuss Take a preliminary vote to uphold/reverse lower court’s decision If they all agree= unanimous ruling If they disagree= issue a majority and dissenting opinion The majority is the ruling Enforcing Decisions Ruling becomes law All lower courts and Congress are expected to follow the ruling

Selecting Justices

Nomination and Confirmation Process Constitutional Requirements Not much detail in the Constitution but… The person must be nominated by the president and receive Senate consent Confirmation by the Senate 80% of presidential nominations for Supreme Court have been confirmed Not a quick or easy process

Nomination and Confirmation Process The Process and Politics If a justice retires or dies, the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee begin working on the nomination process Possible candidates are studied, analyzed, and various opinions are heard before anyone is nominated Once the president has chosen a candidate, he/she is introduced to the public The candidate then works with Congress and either be approved or disapproved. What kind of person would you want to be a Justice?

Constitutional Interpretation

Interpreting the Constitution Judicial Restraint—philosophy that courts should generally avoid overturning laws passed/actions taken by democratically elected bodies Judicial Activism—philosophy that courts must sometimes step into political and social controversies in order to protect Constitutional rights Which do you agree with?

Interpreting the Constitution Stare decisis—”let the decision stand” Serves a precedent (model) on which to base other decisions in cases that raise the same legal issue Turn to page 429 in your textbook We will read the cases together Answer the “critical thinking” question

Interpreting the Constitution Judicial Philosophy Originalism—judicial philosophy that interprets the Constitution by exploring understanding of the text that people had when they adopted the Constitution “Living” Constitution—claims that the Constitution is dynamic and that modern society should be considered when interpreting key constitutional text Which do you agree with?