THE NATIONAL JUDICIARY

1
THE NATIONAL JUDICIARY
2
BASICS OF THE JUDICIAL BRANCH- Monday, March 31

• PART 1

3
SUMMARY OF THE NATIONAL JUDICIARY

• United States has a dual system of courts a
  federal court system and the court systems of
  each of the fifty states
• Under the Articles of Confederation there was NO
  national court system
• Weaknesses of the Articles led to the creation of
  Article III of the Constitution which states that
  there shall be one Supreme Court and that
  Congress may establish a system of inferior courts

4
THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM
Jurisdiction is the authority of the courts to
hear certain cases. Under the Constitution,
federal courts have jurisdiction in cases
involving federal law, treaties, and the
interpretation of the Constitution
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Lower Courts have the
authority to hear cases for the first time both
district courts and the SCOTUS trials conducted,
evidence presented, and juries determine the
outcome of the case
APPELLATE JURISDICTION Courts that hear reviews
or appeals of decisions from the lower Courts
Appellate Courts and the SCOTUS have appellate
jurisdiction
CONCURRENT JURISDICTION Cases can be tried at
both the state and federal level.
5
TYPES OF FEDERAL COURTS
6
STRUCTURE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM

• District Courts created under the Judiciary Act
  of 1789 to serve as trial courts at the federal
  level
• Every state has at least one district court
  (larger states may have several) Washington, DC
  and Puerto Rico have one each
• 94 District Courts total hearing more than 80 of
  all federal cases

• Courts of Appeals designed to help lessen the
  work of the Supreme Court
• Appellate Courts decide appeals from the district
  courts and review decisions of federal
  administrative agencies
• 13 Appellate Courts (divided into circuits)
  circuit for Washington DC
• Panel of judges rather than jury

7
FEDERAL CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
8
STRUCTURE OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SCOTUS

• Supreme Court of the United States only court
  actually created by the Constitution
• Final authority in dealing with all questions
  arising from the Constitution, federal laws, and
  treaties
• Both original AND appellate jurisdiction
  original jurisdiction in cases involving
  representatives of a foreign government or cases
  where a state is a party
• Congress establishes the size of the SCOTUS
  (power to set number of judges) 9 total judges

9
SUPREME COURT JUSTICES

• John Roberts
• Antonin Scalia
• Anthony Kennedy
• Clarence Thomas
• Ruth Bader Ginsburg
• Stephen Breyer
• Sam Alito
• Sonia Sotomayor
• Elana Kagan

10
AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY?

• What does Hamilton mean when he suggests that
  judges must be independent?
• How does an independent judiciary guard the
  Constitution and the rights of individuals?
• From whom?
• How might we ensure that judges are independent?

• Not only was ALEX stylish, but smart too! What a
  ladys Man!

11
AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY

• NO. 78 Summary.
• Judges free to make decisions that contradict the
  government or powerful groups, without
  retribution.
• Judges rule based on the facts of a case and
• the law, not on loyalty to an individual or
  group.
• Judges protect the Constitution and the minority
  from temporary elected majorities.

12

• How is this accomplished at the federal level?
• Appointment rather than election
• Lifetime tenures for judges
• Compensation requirement
• THUS THE ARGUMENT..should judges be subject to
  limited terms rather than lifetime appointments?

13
PROCESS OF THE COURT- Wednesday, April 2

• PART 2

14
JUDICIAL SELECTION OVERVIEW

• The POTUS appoints federal judges with
  confirmation of the Senate.
• Under the Constitution, there are no formal
  qualifications for federal judges
• Serve during good behavior for life
• Life terms allow judges to be free from political
  pressures when deciding cases
• May be removed through impeachment and conviction
  

15
WARM UP

• HOW SHOULD THE LAW BE INTERPRETED? STRICT OR
  LOOSE?

16
JUDICIAL SELECTION LOWER COURTS

• Due to the number of appointments made to the
  lower courts, the DOJ and WH handle most of the
  nominations
• Senatorial Courtesy has traditionally been used
  (practice of allowing individual senators who
  represent the state where the district is located
  to approve or disapprove potential nominees)
• Because appellate courts cover several states,
  individual senators have less influence and
  senatorial courtesy does NOT play a role in the
  nomination process
• Senate tends to scrutinize appeals court judges
  more closely, since they are more likely to
  interpret the law and set precedent

17
JUDICIAL SELECTION SCOTUS

• Presidents may only appoint to the SCOTUS when a
  vacancy occurs during their term in office
• Presidents consider the following when making
  appointments
• Party affiliation
• Judicial philosophy
• Judicial experience
• Litmus Test
• Acceptability (ABA, IGs, or endorsements from
  other justices)

18
JUDICIAL SELECTION BACKGROUND OF JUDGES

• Almost all federal judges have had some form of
  legal training, have held positions in
  government, or have served as lawyers for leading
  law firms, as federal district attorneys or as
  law professors
• Until recently, few African Americans, Hispanics,
  or women were appointed as judges to the lower
  courts
• Lyndon Johnson appointed the first African
  American (Thurgood Marshall) to the SCOTUS
• Ronald Reagan appointed the first women (Sandra
  Day OConnor) to the SCOTUS

19
THE COURT AT WORK ACCEPTING CASES

• Thousands of cases are appealed to the SCOTUS
  every year with only a few hundred cases actually
  being heard most cases denied because the
  justices either agree with the lower court
  decision or believe the case does not involve a
  significant federal question
• Rule of Four four of the nine judges must agree
  to hear a case
• Most of the cases accepted may be disposed of in
  brief orders returned to the lower court for
  reconsideration because of a related case that
  was recently decided
• Cases presented to the SCOTUS for possible review
  are done so by writ of certiorari or
  certificate

20
THE COURT AT WORK BRIEFS/ARGUMENTS

• Once case reaches the SCOTUS, lawyers for each
  party to the case file a written brief (detailed
  statement of the facts of the case supporting a
  particular position by presenting arguments based
  on relevant facts and citations from previous
  cases)
• Amicus Curiae filed by third parties that
  either support or reject the case
• Oral arguments allow both sides to present their
  positions to the justices during a 30 minute
  period. Justices may interrupt the lawyers,
  raising questions or challenging points of law

21
THE COURT AT WORK WRITING OPINIONS

• Once the SCOTUS has made a decision, that
  decision is explained in a written statement
  (opinion). If voting with the majority, the CJ
  selects who will write the opinion if voting
  with the minority, the most senior associate
  justice of the majority selects who will write
  the opinion
• Majority Opinion a majority of the justices
  agree on the decisions and its reasons
• Concurring Opinion a justice who agrees with
  the majority but not with the reasoning
• Dissenting Opinion justice(s) who disagree with
  the majority
• Majority opinions become precedents

22
THE COURT AS A POLICY-MAKER- Friday, April 4

• PART 3

23
JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY

• Judicial philosophy of activism and restraint is
  not the same as political philosophy (ideology)
• Judicial Activism (intervention) holds that the
  Court should play an active role in determining
  national policies.
• The philosophy advocates applying the
  Constitution to social and political questions,
  especially where constitutional rights have been
  violated or unacceptable conditions exist
• Judicial Restraint the Court should avoid
  taking the initiative on social and political
  questions, operating strictly within the limits
  of the Constitution and upholding the acts of
  Congress unless the acts clearly violate specific
  provisions of the Constitution.
• Restraint involves only a limited use of judicial
  powers and advocates the belief that the court
  should be more passive allowing the executive and
  legislative branches to handle policy-making

24
JUDICIAL VIEWPOINTS JUDICIAL LIBERALS

• Broad interpretation of the Elastic Clause
• Broad interpretations of civil rights and laws
• Pro-choice decisions
• Strict limits on the separation of church and
  state
• Affirmative action programs to end discrimination

25
JUDICIAL VIEWPOINTS JUDICIAL CONSERVATIVES

• Stricter limits on the use of the Commerce Clause
  (less power for federal government)
• Limited uses of the Elastic Clause
• More local and state control of civil rights
  questions
• Pro-life decisions
• Community standards for speech and obscenity
• Governments role in protecting from obscenity,
  immorality
• Affirmative action as a form of reverse
  discrimination
• Community moral limits to lifestyle choices

26
JUDICIAL VIEWPOINTS JUDICIAL RESTRAINT

• The idea of not overturning previous cases if
  possible
• Natural rights of citizens that government must
  leave alone
• Article III as a statement of SCOTUS powers to
  resolve disputes only
• Article III as NOT giving the SCOTUS the power to
  create policy
• Preserving the integrity of the 9th 10th
  Amendments
• Idea that Congress should be in charge of new
  policy or create amendments
• The idea that the Founders built a government of
  limits and these should be followed

27
JUDICIAL VIEWPOINTS JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

• Overturning previous cases more easily if those
  are seen as wrong
• Judicial review as a proper and well-established
  power
• The Fourteenth Amendment giving the federal
  government power to incorporate
• The idea that the history of the state and local
  courts is a history of abuses of civil rights and
  segregation and the federal government should
  intervene
• The Constitution is silent on rights like
  privacy and innocent until proven guilty so
  the courts should protect these broadly
• Founders expected leaders to adapt the
  Constitution over time and wrote the document
  with this in mind
• Courts might try to correct laws or institutions
  over issues such as search and seizure rights,
  privacy rights, counsel rights
• Courts might try to change the ways the federal,
  state, or local governments try to set up rules,
  controls, laws, that affect the federal system

28

• We will now look at a website to go over court
  cases, and the arguments/ proceedings behind
  them. Dont worry it will be funnsies.
• http//www.icivics.org/games/argument-wars? where
  you too can be a lawyer, aim high youse guys