THE FEDERAL COURTS STUDENT NOTES 10.2

SCOTUS IN ACTION Session October-June Writ of certiorari Rule of Four US gov’t is party (1/2 caseload) solicitor general represent US Amicus curiae – influence judges, offer new arguments, lobbying for the court Role of CJ – speaks first, votes last, guides debate, writes decision for majority opinion 100 cases/year Tie – lower court decision stands 2/5 cases unanimous

Writs of Certiorari The Rule of Four requires agreement of four justices to hear the case Involving significant federal or constitutional question Involving conflicting decisions by circuit courts Involving constitutional interpretation by one of the highest state courts

OPINIONS Justices issue a written document explaining their reasoning in a case, known as a majority opinion, or by issuing one of two types of other opinions: a concurrence or a dissent.

POWER OF SCOTUS Decisions are LAW OF THE LAND Make policy through new interpretation of laws or Constitution Extend meaning of current law Establish precedent (stare decisis) – “let the decision stand” Similar cases decided in similar manner

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM federal judiciary should take an active role in using its powers to check the activities of Congress, state legislatures, and administrative agencies when those government bodies exceed their authority Opponents: usurps the power of the elected branches of government Defenders: form of judicial review

Arguments for Judicial Activism Courts should correct injustices when other branches or state governments refuse to do so. Courts are the last resort for those without the power or influence to gain new laws.

Arguments Against Judicial Activism Judges lack expertise in designing and managing policies. The court makes decisions that require funding state governments don’t have or would prefer to spend elsewhere. Courts are not accountable because judges are not elected and serve life terms.

JUDICIAL RESTRAINT The opposite of activism… courts should defer to the decisions made by the legislative and executive branches, because members of Congress and the president are elected by the people whereas members of he federal judiciary are not

CHECKS ON JUDICIARY No implementation power Appointed by POTUS Confirmed by Senate Impeachable COTUS limit size and jurisdiction Overturn decision w/ amendment COTUS passes slightly revised law

Public Opinion and the Courts Defying public opinion may harm the legitimacy and reputation of the Supreme Court. Appointment process and life terms insulate justices from public opinion. Justices deliberate in secret. Impeachment and lack of enforcement power mean justices are not completely isolated from public opinion. The Court counts on others to respect its decisions.

ROLE OF THE COURT Not representative of American public Should the opinion of the court represent the opinion of the majority? (Democracy) Or leave it up to the people’s branch, Congress? Protects the Constitution which was the will of the people

Checks on Judicial Power Public Opinion and the Courts Restrains and energizes Activism coincides with political change Most changes in Court come from changes in its personnel (not from Congress)

MARSHALL COURT Legacy: Strengthened the court and the federal government Judicial Review: Marbury v. Madison Appointed in 1801 by John Adams

JUDICIAL REVIEW John Marshall, one of the midnight appointments, now Chief Justice Decision: Madison was wrong however, The Judiciary Act of 1789 contradicted the plain words of the Constitution about SC’s jurisdiction Outcome: SC did not have jurisdiction over the case Declared an act of Congress unconstitutional

Judicial Review Judicial review: the right of the federal courts to rule on the constitutionality of laws and executive actions. It is the chief judicial weapon in the checks and balances system.

WARREN COURT Appointed by Eisenhower 1953-1969 Former Governor of California LEGACY: liberal decisions – ACTIVIST COURT Cases: Church and State: Engel v. Vitale Free Speech: Tinker v. Des Moines Desegregated schools: Brown v. Board of Education Topeka, KA Criminal Rights: Gideon v. Wainwright- entitled legal representation Miranda v. Arizona- safeguard while under arrest

BURGER COURT Appointed by Nixon along with 3 others including Rehnquist (1969-86) LEGACY: disappointed Nixon’s conservative agenda Nixon meant to reverse liberalism of Warren Court United States v. Nixon 1974 Roe v. Wade Abortion legal in first trimester