judicial decision-making jamie monogan university of georgia october 15, 2014
TRANSCRIPT
Objectives
By the end of this meeting, participants should be able to:•Describe the appeals process, including the Supreme Court’s process of hearing an appeal.•Argue whether the Supreme Court should rule by ideology or precedent.
Common Law and Legal Precedent• The U.S. operates largely under a
common law system– Higher-level courts set legal
precedents– Stare decisis– Overturning of precedent– Common law used in Britain as well
• Many other countries have a civil law system
The Path of a Supreme Court Case• Deciding what cases to hear
– The “rule of four” and writ of certiorari– Court receives about 8,000 petitions a
year and takes fewer than 80 cases
• Often pick cases where lower court decisions are at odds
• Lower court ruling stands if the Supreme Court doesn’t take the case
The Path of a Supreme Court Case• Once a case is granted “cert” the
two sides submit briefs– Others also submit briefs as amicus
curiae
• Oral arguments allow each side to make its case before the Court
• Justices meet in a private conference– Discuss case and opinion writing
CONCEPT MAP
ATTITUDINAL MODEL
This model of judicial decision making posits that a judge’s behavior can be predicted largely by his or her policy attitudes. It perceives judges of the court as motivated by policy goals and unconstrained by the law. Thus, they decide cases according to ideological preference rather than by the meaning or intention of legal texts or by precedent.
STRATEGIC MODEL
The strategic model acknowledges that judges seek to achieve policy goals. But it also acknowledges that they are subject to certain constraints in doing so. Since they cannot act simply according to preference, they must act strategically to achieve their goals given the constraints.
LEGAL MODEL
The legal model assumes that judges submit to the law when making decisions. If a judge has any personal preference for an outcome in a case, it is assumed that he or she leaves these preferences aside and defers to the facts of the case, the plain meaning of the Constitution or statute, the intention of its framers, or legal precedent when making his or her decision.
Minority Rights versus Majority Rule• Minority groups historically have
turned to the courts to help overturn discriminatory laws–Fighting of Jim Crow laws in the
South
• Courts can protect rights and liberties
• Often courts follow public opinion
Restraint versus Activism• Categorize judges based on their
philosophical approach to the law–Strict constructivism & judicial
restraint– Judicial activism
• Judiciary is the least political branch, but still deeply political–Today activism can be seen by both
liberal and conservative justices
Politics of Judicial Appointments• Appointments have become
more contentious and confirmations have slowed down
• The more ideological the nominee, the more contentious
• Judicial appointments are a way for presidents to leave a legacy