pearson education, inc., © 2005 the courts chapter fifteen

Pearson Education, Inc., © 2005

The Courts Chapter Fifteen


State Courts

• 1st American Courts were state courts• Under Articles no national judiciary• Constitution created national judiciary, but most

legal cases still handled at state level.– Every state has its own judicial arrangements.– Basic structure

• Trial courts, courts of appeals, court of last resort.• Decisions of state supreme courts may be appealed to the

federal Supreme Court if the case involves a federal statute or the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.


State Trial Courts

• In trials there are two sides:– Plaintiff: the person bringing the suit– Defendant: the person against whom the complaint is

made

• Trials settled alleged violations of the criminal and civil codes.

• Civil code: regulates relations among individuals. Violators are sued by presumed victims, who ask the courts to award damages.

• Criminal code: regulates relations between individuals and society. Alleged violators are prosecuted by the government.


State Trial Courts

• State courts are in a position to be influenced by politics.

• 37 of 50 states some judges subject to election

• In others, they are appointed by state legislature, governor or agency

• Judicial campaigns are generally low key events.


Prosecuting State Cases

• Prosecutors working for the local District Attorney get info from police about criminal activity.

• DA determines whether evidence warrants presentation before a grand jury for prosecution.

• DA is responsible for prosecuting criminal cases.• DA used as stepping stone to other offices.

– Highly visible– Can be controversial


An Independent and Powerful Federal Judiciary

• Court is able to be decisive because of the judiciary’s independence from other political institutions.

• It has the singular and long-established power to say what the Constitution means.

• Independence comes from:– Life tenure – Stable salaries

• Independent but still affected by politics


Tenure and Salary

• Founders believed life tenure for judges was essential to the system of separation of powers.

• Can only be removed by Congress – Impeachment process– Standards are very high– May not lower salaries– Questions as to judicial compensation: not

kept pace with inflation


Judicial Review

• Power of the courts to declare null and void laws of Congress and of state legislatures that they find unconstitutional

• The Constitution affirms itself as “supreme law of the land” but says nothing EXPLICIT about judicial review.

• 1803 S.C. asserted the power of judicial review– Marbury v. Madison– Decision asserted Court’s authority and lack of

authority in certain areas– Invoked the power of judicial review for the first time


Three Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

• Theory of Original Intent– Determines the constitutionality of a law by

ascertaining the intentions of those who wrote the Constitution

• Living Constitution Theory– Places the meaning of the Constitution in light of the

total history of the United States

• Plain-meaning-of-the-text theory– Interprets the law in light of what the words of the

Constitution obviously seem to say.


Judicial Review in Practice

• Manner in which the courts interpret the Constitution can have serious consequences for the nation.

• Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) – Court declared the Missouri Compromise

unconstitutional. They said Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territories.

• Restriction on property rights.



• Lochner v New York (1905) – Courts said the state of New York could not

regulate the number of hours that bakers worked because it deprived them of the right to work as long and as hard as they liked.

– Oliver Wendell Holmes dissented.• Insisted the Constitution should be interpreted as a

living document



• Schechter Poultry Corp. V United States (1935)– Court found the national Industrial Recovery

Act, which addressed labor and competition in the private sector, an unconstitutional intrusion on the power of the states to regulate commerce inside their own borders.

– At odds with president and congress– Stalemate resolved when several judges

switched their votes



• Given these examples, is judicial review a bad thing?

• Is it undemocratic?• Some says yes, but others see judicial review as

a valuable protection against majority infringement on minority civil rights and civil liberties.

• Seldom used • 151 times between 1803 and 2000 did Court

declare a federal law unconstitutional


Statutory Interpretation

• Statutory Interpretation– The judicial act of interpreting and applying ordinary

laws, rather than the Constitution, to specific cases.– Example: Supreme Court heard case involving

endangered species• Nothing specific in the Constitution• Had to apply 1973 law passed by congress. It was a bit

vague.• Court’s interpretation of the law gave it teeth. Said it was

intended to protect all species.• Did their interpretation match up to the intent of the law?

– Cannot assume intentions--rather interpret what is there and apply it.


The Federal Court System in Practice

• Most of the work of the federal branch is carried out by the lower-tier courts.– District Courts

• Lowest level of the federal court system and the courts in which most federal trials are held

– Appeals Courts (Circuit Court of Appeals)• Court to which decisions by federal district courts

are appealed


The Federal Court System in Practice

• Specialized Courts– The Court of International Trade

• Handles cases concerning trade and customs

– U.S. Court of Federal Claims• Hears suits concerning federal contracts, money

damages against the United States, and other issues that involve the federal government


Selection of Federal Judges

• All federal judges hold lifetime positions after their nomination by the president and their confirmation by the Senate.– Senatorial Courtesy: An informal rule that the

Senate will not confirm nominees within or from a state unless they have the approval of the senior senator of that state from the president’s party.


Deciding to Prosecute

• Suspected violations of federal criminal code usually investigated by the FBI.

• U.S. Attorney– Responsible for prosecuting violations of the

federal criminal code– Have very high political profile


Relations Between State and Federal Courts

• Relationship vague under first few decades of the Constitution

• Martin v. Hunter’s Lesee (1816)– Supreme Court ruled it had the power to review and to overturn

the decisions of state courts.

• McCulloch v. Maryland– Decision (1819) in which the Supreme Court first declared a

state law unconstitutional.

• Power to review state laws is essential for maintaining basic uniformity in the laws of the U.S.

• Have found over 1,130 state statutes and constitutional provisions contrary to the federal Constitution


Relations Between State and Federal Courts

• Double jeopardy– Fifth Amendment prohibits double jeopardy (placing

someone on trial for the same crime twice) but something like it can occur if a person is tried in both federal and state courts.

– Are unusual– 1995 bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma

constituted a violation of both state laws against murder and federal laws against conspiracy and manslaughter.

– Rodney King example. Officers not found guilty at state level. Federal prosecutors brought charges and convicted two of four the officers.


The Supreme Court: Process of Appointments

• Process is a political one

• Nominated by the president

• Evaluated by the Senate Judiciary Committee, and confirmed by a vote of the full Senate

• 1st half of the 20th century, presidential nominations to the Court were confirmed by the Senate as matter of course


The Supreme Court: Process of Appointments

• Since 1955, every Senate Court nominee has appeared before the judiciary committee,

• Since 1968, the Senate’s likelihood of rejecting presidential nominees has increased.

• Robert Bork, example – created term borking: Politicizing the nomination process through an organized public campaign that portrays the nominee as a dangerous extremist.


Stare Decisis

• Stare Decisis “let the decision stand”– In court rulings, reliance on consistency with

precedents

• Precedent– Previous court decision or ruling applicable to a

particular case

• Legal distinction– The legal difference between a case at hand and

previous cases decided by the courts


Certs

• Write of certiorari (cert)– A document issued by the Supreme Court indicating

that the Court will review a decision made by a lower court

– Court rejects most cert petitions (8 to 9K cases appealed each year)

– Number of certs granted by Supreme Court has fallen in recent years.

• 1970s as many as 400 cases annually• 2003 court heard only 87 cases.

– Issuing cert requires the vote of 4 justices.


Role of Chief Justice

– Supreme Court• Comprised of 8 associate justices and The

Chief Justice– Has only one vote – Many tasks are of ceremonial or housekeeping

nature– Some responsibilities are influential

» Assignment power» Ex: Warren and the Brown v. Board of

Education opinion


Role of Solicitor General

– Government official responsible for presenting before the Court the position of the presidential administration

– Involvement of Solicitor General signal that the president and attorney general have strong views on the subject

– Employed by the Justice Department– Report to the AG– Chosen for their legal skills


Role of Clerks

– Perform much of the day-to-day work

– Each justice has between 2 and 4 clerks

– Initially review certs

– Also draft many opinions


Supreme Court Decision Making

– Briefs submitted to the Court• Written statements presented to a court by lawyers on behalf

of clients• Justices listen to oral arguments in plenary session (all

justices in attendance)– Half hour for each side

• Reach preliminary decision after oral argument in private conference

• Express views and preliminary votes taken in order of seniority

• If in majority, Chief Justice assigns the writing of the opinion If in minority, senior justice in majority makes the assignment

• Drafts are circulated and revisions made



– Dissenting opinion• Written opinion presenting the reasoning of

judges who vote against the majority

– Concurring opinion• A written opinion prepared by judges who

vote with the majority but who wish either to disagree with or to elaborate on some aspect of the majority opinion



– Once court reaches decision it sends (or remands) the case to lower court for implementation.

– Lower courts then apply the law accordingly.


Voting on the Supreme Court

– Judicial activism• Doctrine that says the principle of stare decisis

should sometimes be sacrificed in order to adapt the Constitution to changing conditions.

– Restorationist• Judge who thinks that the only way the original

meaning of the Constitution can be restored is by ignoring the doctrine of stare decisis.

– Judicial Restraint• Doctrine that says courts should, if at all possible,

avoid overturning a prior court decision.


Checks on Court Power

• Constitutional Amendment

• Statutory Revision

• Nonimplementation


Litigation as Political Strategy

• Courts used by interest groups to place issues on the political agenda

• Class Action Suits–Suit brought on behalf of all

individuals in a particular category whether or not they are actually participating in the suit

pearson education, inc., © 2005 the courts chapter fifteen

Documents

pearson education

courts of appeals

american courts

courts chapter

state legislatures

state level

politics slide

time slide