1. The Federal Courts The Judiciary Branch

2. Founders Intention and Constitutional Interpretation Founders wanted Courts to be strict constructionists: judges are bound by the wording of the Constitution Judicial Review: Power of the courts to declare laws unconstitutional It is the chief judicial weapon in the checks and balances system

3. Constitutional Interpretation Activist: judges should look to the underlying principles of the Constitution Today, most strict constructionists tend to be conservative, most activists tend to be liberal

4. The Development of the Federal Courts Article III of the U.S. Constitution establishes the judicial branch Supreme Court only court specifically mentioned in Constitution Constitution allows Congress to create “inferior” federal courts

5. National Supremacy and Slavery (1789 – 1861) Marbury v. Madison (1803): The Supreme Court could declare a congressional act unconstitutional McCulloch v. Maryland (1819): The power granted to federal government should be construed broadly, and federal law is supreme over state law Dred Scott v Sandford (1857): SC ruled blacks were not citizens of the US, and federal law in the northern territories was unconstitutional

6. Government and the Economy (1865 – 1936) The Supreme Court was supportive of private property, but could not develop a principle distinguishing between reasonable and unreasonable regulation of business The court upheld the use of injunctions to prevent labor strikes, struck down the federal income tax, sharly limited the reach of antitrust laws, restricted powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission, refused to eliminate child labor, and prevented states from setting maximum hours of workl.

7. Government and Political Liberty (1936 – Present) Congress would regulate the economy The Warren Court redefined the relationship of citizens to the government and protected the rights and liberties of citizens Devolution – New era in which powers are shifted from the federal government back to the states

8. Selection of Judges Party background has a strong effect on judicial behavior Appointees for federal courts are reviewed by senators from that state, if the senators are of the president’s party (particularly for U.S. district courts) Senatorial Courtesy: Senators from the president’s party review and appointee for a federal district court in their state; senators can “blue-slip” – veto a nominee Litmus test: test of ideological purity for nominating judges (Abortion is a key issue)

9. Federal Court Cases Federal question cases: involving the U.S. Constitution, federal law, or treaties Diversity cases: involving different states, or citizens of different states

11. Federal Court Cases Some cases that begin in state courts can be appealed to the Supreme Court Controversies between two state governments can only be heard by the Supreme Court

12. Cases for the Supreme Court Hears only cases involving ambassadors and public ministers (where a state is a party) Every cases is on appeal and chosen by SCOTUS

13. Writ of Cert + Cases heard by SCOTUS Requires a WRIT OF CERTIORARI (CERT): If four justices agree to hear the case, a cert is issued and a hearing is scheduled Cases heard must pose significant federal or constitutional question Involve conflicting decisions by circuit courts Contain a constitutional interpretation by one of the high state courts regarding state or federal law

14. SCOTUS democratic?? Few applications are accepted and costs if accepted are high Costs can be lowered or covered in full for indigents – poor people by the government (called in informa pauperis)

16. The members of the Supreme Court, front row, from left are: Anthony Kennedy, John Paul Stevens, Chief Justice John Roberts, Antonin Scalia, and Clarence Thomas. Back row, from left are: Samuel Alito, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Sonia Sotomayor. P. 447

17. Legal Standing There must be a real controversy between adversaries, and the litigants must demonstrate personal harm Class action law-suits: Identifiable group of people can have standing if they share similar circumstances You don’t have to go to court You receive a share of the judgment Since 1974 the SC listens to cases where all members of the groups are notified individually Linda Brown was refused admission to a white elementary school in Topeka, Kansas. On her behalf, the NAACP brought a class- action suit that resulted in the 1954 landmark Supreme Court decision Brown v. Board of Education. p. 445

18. The Federal Courts

19. The Powers of the Supreme Court Oral arguments are presented later (30 mins each) Soliciter general: (3 rd ranking officer in the Justice Dept) Decides which cases the government will appeal from the lower courts and approves of every case presented to the Supreme Court Briefs submitted from lawyers from both sides Brief: a document that sets forth the facts of the case, summarizes the lower-court decision, gives the arguments for the side presented and discusses precedents on the issue Donald B. Verrilli, Jr.

20. Other important facts Amicus curiae “Friend of the court” - Amicus brief is from an interested party not directly involved in the suit Clerks from top law schools develop the justices’ opinions and decisions

21. How do they decide on a case? Justices meet in conference to allow for exchange of ideas and arguments and to vote – Chief Justice manages votes Majority of justices must be in agreement Per curiam opinion: the opinion is brief and unsigned (Explains why they made their decision) 3 Kinds of Opinions: Opinion of the Court is the majority opinion Concurring opinion – agrees with the decision but uses different reasoning to reach that conclusion Dissenting opinion – minority opinion. Disagreeing with the decision

23. Influences on the Supreme Court LiberalConservative Loose ConstructionistStrict Constructionist Moderate Backgrounds of Justices Public Opinion Interpretations Views/philosophies

24. How Federal Courts make public policy 3 Ways Interpreting the Constitution or Law Extending the reach of existing law Designing remedies that involve judges acting in administrative or legal ways Over 130 laws have been declared unconstitutional 260 cases have been overturned Stare decisis: Let a prior decision stand

25. Checks on Judicial Power Courts rely on the other government branches to implement decisions Congress checks courts in several ways Change the # of the judges Amending the Constitution Appointments – not confirming certain judges Senate Judiciary Committee – listens to Senate Confirmation/Refusal – How Congress chooses a judge Impeachment – Rare Revising legislation – changing the law that was passed