The Federal Courts

Article III Section I gave Congress the authority to establish other courts as it saw fit. Section II specifies the judicial power of the Supreme Court and discusses the Court’s original and appellate jurisdiction Section III defines treason, and mandates that at least two witnesses appear in such cases.

Origins of Judicial Branch Developed around British system of Common Law Based on Precedence Practice of deciding new cases with reference to former decisions Stare Decisis “let the decision stand” Leaving the decision based on an earlier, similar case the same

The Nature of the Judicial System Participants in the Judicial System Litigants Plaintiff - the party bringing the charge Defendant - the party being charged Jury - the people (normally 12) who often decide the outcome of a case Standing to sue - plaintiffs have a serious interest in the case.

The Federal Court System Constitutional courts Federal courts specifically created by the U.S. Constitution or Congress pursuant to its authority in Article III Legislative courts Courts established by Congress for specialized purposes, such as the Court of Military Appeals

The Judiciary Act of 1789 Established the basic three-tiered structure of the federal court system Supreme Court: 1 Circuit Court: 13 (appellate court) District courts: 94 (trial courts)

District Courts At least one in each state, DC, and Puerto Rico Trial courts with original jurisdiction No appeals, only federal courts in which trials are held and juries may sit Jurisdiction includes federal crimes, civil suits under federal law, and civil suits between citizens of different states where the amount exceeds 75,000

Courts of Appeals Appellate jurisdiction only Most cases come from district courts Normally hear cases in a panel of judges and therefore decisions are made by majority vote

Supreme Court Number of justices began at 6 and is now set at 9 (1869) 1 Chief Justice of Supreme Court Justices 8 Associate Supreme Court Justices Begin session in Oct.

How Federal Court Judges Are Selected Often a very political process Judges nominated by president and confirmed by Senate Can reflect the ideological stamp of the president – 90% Senatorial Courtesy ONLY IN LOWER COURTS!!!

The Politics of Judicial Selection The Lower Courts Senatorial Courtesy: Unwritten tradition where a judge is not confirmed if a senator of the president’s party from the state where the nominee will serve opposes the nomination. Has the effect of the president approving the Senate’s choice

Appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court Nomination Criteria Ideology or Policy Preference—90% Litmus Test

Supreme Court Caseload, 1950-2004 Terms

How a Case Survives the Process by the Supreme Court Characteristics of the cases the Court accepts: Most cases come by writ of certiorari The federal government is the party asking for review. Solicitor General The case involves conflict among circuit courts. The case presents a civil rights or civil liberties question. The case involves ideological and/or policy preferences of the justices. The case has significant social or political interest, as evidenced by the presence of interest group amicus curiae briefs.

Hearing and Deciding a Case Briefs Oral arguments The Conference and the vote The opinion 4 Types

The Courts and the Policy Agenda A Historical Review Marshall Court (1801-1835) The “Nine Old Men” – switch in time and the New Deal The Warren Court – Liberal Activist – 1953-1969 The Burger Court – 1969-1986 The Rehnquist Court – 1986-2005 The Roberts Court??? – 2005-

Judicial Policy Making and Implementation More than one hundred federal laws have been declared unconstitutional. Ability to overrule itself Judicial Implementation: Refers to how and whether judicial decisions are translated into actual public policies affecting more than the immediate parties to a lawsuit.

Understanding the Courts The Courts and Democracy Courts are not very democratic Not elected Difficult to remove The courts do reflect popular majorities Groups are likely to use the courts when other methods fail – promoting pluralism There are still conflicting rulings leading to deadlock and inconsistency

Understanding the Courts What Courts Should Do: The Scope of Judicial Power Judicial restraint: judges should play a minimal policymaking role - leave the policies to the legislative branch. Which party supports this? Judicial activism: judges should make bold policy decisions and even charting new constitutional ground. Which party/group supports this? Political questions: means of the federal courts to avoid deciding some cases.

Limits on Judicial Branch Congress has the authority to alter the court’s structure & jurisdiction. Congress can propose constitutional amendments that, if ratified, can effectively reverse judicial decisions. Congress can impeach and remove federal judges. President (with advise and consent of Senate) appoints federal judges.

The End