2. The Judicial Branch

3. The Role of the Judicial Branch To interpret and define law To interpret and define law This involves hearing individual cases and deciding how the law should apply This involves hearing individual cases and deciding how the law should apply Remember federalism – there are federal courts for federal law, and state courts for state laws! Remember federalism – there are federal courts for federal law, and state courts for state laws!

4. Where Do the Courts’ Jurisdiction Come From? Article III of the US Constitution creates “one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts” that Congress creates Article III of the US Constitution creates “one Supreme Court, and such inferior courts” that Congress creates Thus, Congress creates the system underneath Supreme Court Thus, Congress creates the system underneath Supreme Court

5. State Courts Special courts (have only limited jurisdiction) Special courts (have only limited jurisdiction) Divorce Court Probate Court Small Claims Court Family Court Traffic Court District Courts- jurisdiction over cases involving misdemeanors crimes District Courts- jurisdiction over cases involving misdemeanors crimes Superior Courts- jurisdiction over cases involving felony crimes Superior Courts- jurisdiction over cases involving felony crimes

6. State Courts State Appeals Courts- hears cases on appeal from Superior Courts State Appeals Courts- hears cases on appeal from Superior Courts State Supreme Court- highest appeals court for State laws State Supreme Court- highest appeals court for State laws

7. 3 Major Steps in the Federal Court System District Courts Court of Appeals Supreme Court 941 123 1 9 CourtsJudges

8. Jurisdiction Jurisdiction – the authority of a court to hear (try and decide on) a case Jurisdiction – the authority of a court to hear (try and decide on) a case 4 Types of Jurisdiction: 4 Types of Jurisdiction: Exclusive Jurisdiction – only federal court has authority to hear, state court cannot Exclusive Jurisdiction – only federal court has authority to hear, state court cannot

9. Jurisdiction Concurrent Jurisdiction – federal or state court could hear Concurrent Jurisdiction – federal or state court could hear Original Jurisdiction – court is the first one to hear a case Original Jurisdiction – court is the first one to hear a case Appellate Jurisdiction – court can only hear a case on appeal Appellate Jurisdiction – court can only hear a case on appeal

10. Jurisdiction U.S. District Courts have original jurisdiction U.S. District Courts have original jurisdiction The Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction The Court of Appeals has appellate jurisdiction Supreme Court has both Supreme Court has both

11. SUPREME COURT Original jurisdiction in which cases? Original jurisdiction in which cases? Constitutionally speaking: Constitutionally speaking: cases affecting ambassadors and other diplomats cases affecting ambassadors and other diplomats cases in which a state is a party (either as plaintiff or defendant) cases in which a state is a party (either as plaintiff or defendant) In actual practice, only cases involving disputes between two or more states are heard originally by the US Supreme Court In actual practice, only cases involving disputes between two or more states are heard originally by the US Supreme Court

12. Appointment of Judges Only President can nominate someone to be a federal judge Only President can nominate someone to be a federal judge Senate majority vote required to confirm Senate majority vote required to confirm Judges serve for life Judges serve for life

13. Why Life Terms? Founding Fathers wanted an independent judiciary Founding Fathers wanted an independent judiciary They did not want judges to be influenced by election or votes They did not want judges to be influenced by election or votes Judges can only be removed by Congressional impeachment Judges can only be removed by Congressional impeachment

14. District Court Federal District Court is the principal trial court in the system (1 st trial for the vast majority of federal cases) Federal District Court is the principal trial court in the system (1 st trial for the vast majority of federal cases) 94 Districts divided geographically 94 Districts divided geographically Hears both criminal and civil cases Hears both criminal and civil cases

15. Process of a Criminal Case U.S. attorney gathers up all the evidence against accused U.S. attorney gathers up all the evidence against accused Presents it to a grand jury, 16 to 23 people who decide whether there is enough evidence to indict Presents it to a grand jury, 16 to 23 people who decide whether there is enough evidence to indict If they vote to indict, trial begins with a new jury If they vote to indict, trial begins with a new jury

16. Process of a Criminal Case If you lose your trial, you have the option to appeal to a higher court If you lose your trial, you have the option to appeal to a higher court The higher court does not have to hear your case, they will only take it if there is a significant problem with the lower court decision The higher court does not have to hear your case, they will only take it if there is a significant problem with the lower court decision Higher courts have the option to overturn or modify lower court decisions Higher courts have the option to overturn or modify lower court decisions

17. Appeals Courts Person found guilty in Federal District court would appeal decision to Federal Appeals Court Person found guilty in Federal District court would appeal decision to Federal Appeals Court Appeals Court has just 1 judge Appeals Court has just 1 judge Only decides if there were any mistakes or misinterpretations of law in 1 st trial Only decides if there were any mistakes or misinterpretations of law in 1 st trial

18. Supreme Court The “Court of Last Resort” – highest court in the country The “Court of Last Resort” – highest court in the country Has power of judicial review Has power of judicial review

19. Judicial Review Judicial Review – the power to declare laws or gov’t actions unconstitutional Judicial Review – the power to declare laws or gov’t actions unconstitutional All comes from the case of Marbury v. Madison – it set precedent for judicial review All comes from the case of Marbury v. Madison – it set precedent for judicial review

20. Marbury v. Madison Adams has just lost to Jefferson in the election of 1800 Adams has just lost to Jefferson in the election of 1800 To protect his party, Adams appointed Federalists to loads of new judgeships To protect his party, Adams appointed Federalists to loads of new judgeships These late appointments known as “the midnight judges” These late appointments known as “the midnight judges”

21. Marbury v. Madison Jefferson was angry He ordered Madison (Sec. of State) not to deliver commissions Marbury, who was one of the midnight judges, sued Madison to get his commission

22. Decision in Marbury v. Madison Judiciary Act of 1789 gave Supreme Court original jurisdiction in disputes about judgeships Judiciary Act of 1789 gave Supreme Court original jurisdiction in disputes about judgeships Article III of Constitution only gives Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction in those cases Article III of Constitution only gives Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction in those cases

23. Decision in Marbury v. Madison Therefore, Judiciary Act of 1789 was ruled to be Therefore, Judiciary Act of 1789 was ruled to be 1 st time Supreme Court struck down a law as unconstitutional- established the precedent for judicial review 1 st time Supreme Court struck down a law as unconstitutional- established the precedent for judicial review

24. John Marshall Chief Justice during Marbury v. Madison Chief Justice during Marbury v. Madison Was one of the Federalist judges appointed by Adams late in his term Was one of the Federalist judges appointed by Adams late in his term Marshall wanted to establish more power for the Federal judiciary Marshall wanted to establish more power for the Federal judiciary It was his idea to declare the It was his idea to declare the Judiciary Act unconstitutional Judiciary Act unconstitutional He strengthened the He strengthened the Supreme Court Supreme Court

25. Trial Process at Supreme Court Trial does not function like principal trial courts Trial does not function like principal trial courts No “evidence” presented, or witnesses questioned, etc. No “evidence” presented, or witnesses questioned, etc. Rather, one attorney for each side presents his arguments for 30 minutes, while being questioned by justices Rather, one attorney for each side presents his arguments for 30 minutes, while being questioned by justices

26. Trial Process at Supreme Court Once arguments are over, justices will write opinions on the case, and each justice chooses which opinion to sign his/her name to Once arguments are over, justices will write opinions on the case, and each justice chooses which opinion to sign his/her name to Majority Opinion – final decision on the case, signed by at least 5 justices Majority Opinion – final decision on the case, signed by at least 5 justices Becomes precedent for how future similar cases should be decided Becomes precedent for how future similar cases should be decided

27. Trial Process at Supreme Court Dissenting Opinion – written or signed by any justice who disagrees with the majority Dissenting Opinion – written or signed by any justice who disagrees with the majority It’s important because it can become the logic for a future group of justices to overturn this decision It’s important because it can become the logic for a future group of justices to overturn this decision

28. Trial Process at Supreme Court Concurring Opinion – written by a justice who votes with the majority, but disagrees with their reasoning as to why Concurring Opinion – written by a justice who votes with the majority, but disagrees with their reasoning as to why If a justice has a conflict of interest in a case, he/she may recuse himself (stay off of the case) If a justice has a conflict of interest in a case, he/she may recuse himself (stay off of the case)

29. Important Historical Cases Marbury v. Madison (1804) – established precedent of judicial review Marbury v. Madison (1804) – established precedent of judicial review Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) – people of African descent imported into the U.S. were not and could never be considered citizens Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) – people of African descent imported into the U.S. were not and could never be considered citizens Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) – said segregation was constitutional as long as both races had equal facilities (separate but equal) Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) – said segregation was constitutional as long as both races had equal facilities (separate but equal) Brown v. Board of Education (1954) – overturned Plessy decision on the grounds that segregation violated the 14th Amendment Brown v. Board of Education (1954) – overturned Plessy decision on the grounds that segregation violated the 14th Amendment

30. Important Historical Cases Mapp v. Ohio (1961)- ruled that materials or info gained from an illegal search by police cannot be used as evidence against the accused in the trial Mapp v. Ohio (1961)- ruled that materials or info gained from an illegal search by police cannot be used as evidence against the accused in the trial Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)- ruled that all defendants had right to attorney, even if poor Gideon v. Wainwright (1963)- ruled that all defendants had right to attorney, even if poor Miranda v. Arizona (1966)- ruled that accused had to be read their 5 th Amendment rights before questioning Miranda v. Arizona (1966)- ruled that accused had to be read their 5 th Amendment rights before questioning Roe v. Wade (1973)- ruled that states could NOT prohibit women from having legal abortions Roe v. Wade (1973)- ruled that states could NOT prohibit women from having legal abortions Texas v. Johnson (1989)- ruled that states could not make laws preventing the burning of the US flag Texas v. Johnson (1989)- ruled that states could not make laws preventing the burning of the US flag

31. Important Cases of Student Rights Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) ruled wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under the First Amendment, even on public school grounds. Tinker v. Des Moines School District (1969) ruled wearing armbands is a legitimate form of protest under the First Amendment, even on public school grounds. New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985)- ruled 4 th Amendment ban on unreasonable searches applies to those conducted by public school officials as well as those conducted by law enforcement personnel, but schools can use the less strict standard of “reasonable suspicion” rather than “probable cause” New Jersey v. T. L. O. (1985)- ruled 4 th Amendment ban on unreasonable searches applies to those conducted by public school officials as well as those conducted by law enforcement personnel, but schools can use the less strict standard of “reasonable suspicion” rather than “probable cause” Ingraham v. Wright (1977) - that reasonable physical discipline at school doesn't violate the Constitution. Court said 8 th Amendment was designed to protect convicted criminals from excessive punishment at the hands of the government— not schoolchildren who misbehave. Ingraham v. Wright (1977) - that reasonable physical discipline at school doesn't violate the Constitution. Court said 8 th Amendment was designed to protect convicted criminals from excessive punishment at the hands of the government— not schoolchildren who misbehave.

32. Important Cases of Student Rights Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1987)- ruled students cannot use 1 st Amendment “free speech” clause to defend use of profane and/or obscene language at school Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser (1987)- ruled students cannot use 1 st Amendment “free speech” clause to defend use of profane and/or obscene language at school Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) - Public school student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) as forums for student expression. Censorship of school paper is allowed Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier (1988) - Public school student newspapers that have not been established as forums for student expression are subject to a lower level of First Amendment protection than independent student expression or newspapers established (by policy or practice) as forums for student expression. Censorship of school paper is allowed Roper v. Simmons (2005) – Court ruled that use of death penalty for convicted suspects younger than age 18 violates 8 th Amendment (cruel & unusual punishment). Expanded upon 1988 Supreme Court ruling that executions of younger than 15 yrs old unconstitutional (Thompson v. Oklahoma) Roper v. Simmons (2005) – Court ruled that use of death penalty for convicted suspects younger than age 18 violates 8 th Amendment (cruel & unusual punishment). Expanded upon 1988 Supreme Court ruling that executions of younger than 15 yrs old unconstitutional (Thompson v. Oklahoma)

33. Can you name 3 current Supreme Court justices? Who is the current Chief Justice of US? How many S.C. justices has O’Bama appointed?

34. Current Supreme Court Justices Chief Justice John Roberts Chief Justice John Roberts Appointed: Bush, 2005 Appointed: Bush, 2005 Age: 55 Age: 55 Conservative Conservative

35. Current Supreme Court Justices Antonin Scalia Antonin Scalia Appointed: Reagan, 1986 Appointed: Reagan, 1986 Age: 74 Age: 74 Strong Conservative Strong Conservative

36. Current Supreme Court Justices Anthony Kennedy Anthony Kennedy Appointed: Reagan, 1988 Appointed: Reagan, 1988 Age: 73 Age: 73 Swing Vote (Usually Conservative) Swing Vote (Usually Conservative)

37. Current Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas Clarence Thomas Appointed: Bush, 1991 Appointed: Bush, 1991 Age: 61 Age: 61 Strong Conservative Strong Conservative

38. Current Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg Ruth Bader Ginsburg Appointed: Clinton, 1993 Appointed: Clinton, 1993 Age: 77 Age: 77 Strong Liberal Strong Liberal

39. Current Supreme Court Justices Stephen Breyer Stephen Breyer Appointed: Clinton, 1994 Appointed: Clinton, 1994 Age: 71 Age: 71 Liberal Liberal

40. Current Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito Samuel Alito Appointed: Bush, 2006 Appointed: Bush, 2006 Age: 60 Age: 60 Conservative Conservative

41. Current Supreme Court Justices Sonia Sotomayor Sonia Sotomayor Appointed: Obama, 2009 Appointed: Obama, 2009 Age: 55 Age: 55 Strong Liberal Strong Liberal

42. Current Supreme Court Justices Elena Kagan Elena Kagan Appointed: Obama, 2010 Appointed: Obama, 2010 Age: 50 Age: 50 Liberal Liberal