Ap u.s. government & politics Wednesday, February 7, 2018

Practice fRQ #12

Scotus principles (Continued)

Another Important Principle Precedent All legal argumentation and decision-making rests, to some extent, on previous court decisions Lawyers (in their briefs) and judges (in their opinions) will always cite relevant precedent(s) for every argument or conclusion that they make Stare Decisis Whenever possible, the justices adhere to the principle of “what is already decided” If the Court has already decided a particular legal question, that question is generally considered to be decided for all time BUT: at times the Court will depart from this principle See: Plessy v. Ferguson (1896); Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Judicial Philosophies and Politics Judicial Restraint Deciding cases on the narrowest possible basis; Leaving as much to the political process as possible Virtually all judges will claim to follow this philosophy; They will often accuse judges from different political camps of exercising: Judicial Activism Using judicial decisions to advance a particular political agenda; Sometimes referred to as, “legislating from the bench”

Process & Politics of Presidential Supreme Choice Process & Politics of Presidential Nominations to the Supreme Court

Political Cartoon A Title: The Supreme Court Location Mike Keefe, The Denver Post, Oct. 6, 2004 http://cagle.slate.msn.com/politicalcartoons/

Political Cartoon B Title: Supreme Court - 31 Flavors Robert Ariail, The State, Aug. 10, 2005 http://cagle.slate.msn.com/politicalcartoons/

Political Cartoon D Title: Supreme Court Exam Jimmy Margulies, New Jersey -- The Record, Aug. 11, 2005 http://cagle.slate.msn.com/politicalcartoons/

Factors That Influence Supreme Court Nominations

Factors That Influence Supreme Court Nominations Party affiliation (80% or higher) Judicial Philosophy “Litmus Test” - where nominees stand on controversial issues like abortion Background of nominee (education, experience, race, gender, ethnicity, etc.) Cultivating political support Political favors Interest group input American Bar Association certification Securing a “safe” nominee

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Process Stage 1: Presidential Nomination FBI Investigation WHITE HOUSE REVIEW Certification Stage 2: Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing INTEREST GROUP Influence MEDIA Influence Stage 3: Full Senate Vote Stage 4: Oath of Office?

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Process White House staff reviews candidates and submits a short list to the president FBI background investigation Candidates submit financial disclosure forms ABA grades candidates Interest groups weigh in on candidates President selects nominee Stage 1 Presidential Nomination

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Process Senate Judiciary members and their staffs review candidate’s background (may conduct own investigation) Interest groups may conduct campaigns for or against nominee (including TV ads) Intense media attention to Senate hearings Senate Judiciary Committee questions candidate on judicial philosophy, stands on key issues, etc. Judiciary Committee votes up or down on nominee and sends recommendation to full Senate Stage 2 Senate Judiciary Committee Hearings

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Process Stage 3 Full Senate Vote Floor debate on nominee Confirmation vote by full Senate

U.S. Supreme Court Confirmation Process Stage 4 Oath of Office If confirmed by the Senate, nominee sworn in, usually by Chief Justice Once on the Court, justices often make decisions on the bench very different from what the nominating President had anticipated independent judiciary

Exit Ticket: Practice MCQ The idea that judges ought to freely strike down laws that are inconsistent with their understanding of the Constitution is known as: a. Original intent. b. Judicial restraint. c. Judicial activism. d. Judicial review. e. Stare decisis.  

Op-ed: “the new court-packing plan”

Homework Textbook, Chapter 15: Reading & Outline due Tomorrow Vocab Quiz Tomorrow