Chapter 16: The Federal Courts The Nature of the Judicial The Politics of Judicial Selection The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices The Courts as Policymakers The Courts and Public Policy: An Understanding the Courts Chapter Outline and Learning Objectives The Nature of the Judicial LO 16.1: Identify the basic elements of the American judicial system and the major participants in it. : Outline the structure of the federal court system and the major responsibilities of each component. Chapter Outline and Learning Objectives The Politics of Judicial Selection LO 16.3: Explain the process by which judges and justices are nominated and confirmed. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices : Describe the backgrounds of judges and justices and assess the impact of background on their decisions. Chapter Outline and Learning Objectives The Courts as Policymakers : Outline the judicial process at the Supreme Court level and assess the major factors influencing decisions and their implementation. The Courts and Public Policy: An : Trace the Supreme Court s use of judicial review in major policy battles in various eras of American history. Chapter Outline and Learning Objectives Understanding the Courts LO 16.7: Assess the role of unelected courts and the scope of judicial power in American democracy. 1
The Nature of the Judicial LO 16.1: Identify the basic elements of the American judicial system and the major participants in it. Criminal Law The government charges an individual with violating specific laws. Civil Law Involves a dispute between two parties (one of whom may be the government itself) over a wide range of matters. The Nature of the Judicial Participants in the Judicial Litigants Plaintiff (bring charges) and defendant. Standing to sue Plaintiffs have a serious interest in a case, which depends on whether they have sustained or are likely to sustain a direct and substantial injury. LO 16.1 The Nature of the Judicial LO 16.1 The Nature of the Judicial LO 16.1 Participants in the Judicial (cont.) Class action suits Lawsuits in which a small number of people sue on behalf of all people in similar circumstances. Justiciable disputes Issues capable of being settled as a matter of law. Participants in the Judicial (cont.) Attorneys About a million attorneys are practicing in the United States today. Access to lawyers has become more equal, but that does not mean that quality of representation is equal. The Nature of the Judicial LO 16.1 LO 16.1 Participants in the Judicial (cont.) Groups Class action suits permit a small number of people to sue on behalf of all other people similarly situated. Amicus curiae briefs Legal briefs submitted by a friend of the court for the purpose of influencing a court s decision. 2
Jurisdiction Federal & State Courts state Crimes under state law Cases involved state laws or regulations Family law issues Private contract dispute (not bankruptcy!) Professional malpractice Personal injury lawsuits Traffic violations Federal Crimes under statutes (laws) enacted by Congress) Cases involving federal laws (tax, Soc. Security, broadcasting, civil rights) Cases involving federal bureaucracy Patent, copyright, intellectual property Treaties/Foreign nations Bankruptcy cases : Outline the structure of the federal court system and the major responsibilities of each component. Constitutional Courts Article III courts created by Judiciary Act of 1789. Legislative Courts Article I courts created by Congress for special purposes. Judges have fixed terms and lack protections against removal or salary reductions. Probate/inheritance Disputes between states State Court Supreme Court Courts of Appeal Trial Judges here are elected by the people or appointed by state governors for fix term or for life. These courts est. by state legislature or state constitution Federal Court Supreme Court Courts of Appeal Trial (District Courts) The president appoints all these federal judges with Senate confirmation. These courts est. by U.S. Constitution or Congress Do Cases in State Courts Cross Over to the Federal Side? Yes, they do. But only if such cases involved a federal question (federal law or constitutional issue). A real life case: In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested on kidnapping and violent crime. He voluntarily confessed and signed a statement which policed recorded. At trial, he was convicted based solely on his confession. Miranda appealed to the Arizona Supreme Court claiming his 6 th amendment right to an attorney was violated. Still, this court re-affirmed the decision of the trial court (lower court) and upheld Miranda s conviction. Miranda then appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which agreed to review his case in 1966 => Here is the federal/constitutional question: Did Arizona police violated Miranda s 6 th & 5 th Amendment rights? The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision written by Chief Justice Earl Warren, ruled that the prosecution could not introduce Miranda's confession as evidence in a criminal trial because the police had failed to first inform Miranda of his right to an attorney (6 th amendment) who, in turn, could have prevented Miranda from incriminating himself (5 th amendment). Original Jurisdiction Jurisdiction of courts that hear a case first, usually in trial. Determine facts about a case. Appellate Jurisdiction Courts hear cases on appeal from lower courts. Do not review factual record, only the legal issues involved. 3
District Courts (original jurisdiction) Courts of Appeal (appellate jurisdiction) The Supreme Court (orig & appellate jurs) District Courts The 94 federal courts of original jurisdiction. They are the only federal courts in which trials are held and in which juries may be impaneled. 678 judges preside over cases alone, rare cases require a 3 judge court, and each court has between 2 and 28 judges. District Courts (cont.) Jurisdiction Federal crimes; federal civil suits; civil suits between citizens of different states over $75,000; bankruptcy proceedings; review actions of some federal administrative agencies; admiralty and maritime law cases; and supervision of the naturalization of aliens. District Courts (cont.) Decisions More than 338,000 cases commenced in 2008. Most cases are routine, and few result in policy innovations. Usually judges do not publish their decisions. The loser in a case only has to request an appeal to get one. Courts of Appeal Appellate courts empowered to review all final decisions of district courts. About 75 percent of 61,000 cases filed in courts of appeal yearly come from district courts. Courts of Appeal (cont.) United States is divided into 12 judicial circuits, including one for the District of Columbia. Each circuit serves at least two states. 4
Courts of Appeal (cont.) Each court of appeal normally hears cases in rotating panels consisting of 3 judges but may sit en banc (with all judges present) in important cases. Decisions in either arrangement are made by majority vote of the participating judges. Courts of Appeal (cont.) U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Composed of 12 judges to hear appeals in specialized cases, such as those regarding patents, claims against the United States, and international trade. Courts of Appeal (cont.) Correct errors of procedure and law made in original cases. Hold no trials and hear no testimony. Decisions Set precedent for all the courts and agencies within their jurisdictions. The Supreme Court Top of judicial system and has 9 justices to make decisions. Supreme Court ensures uniformity in interpreting national laws, resolves conflicts among states, and maintains national supremacy in law. Has both original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court (cont.) Original Jurisdiction Cases involving foreign diplomats and cases involving a state. Appellate Jurisdiction Cases from U.S. Courts of Appeal, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Legislative Courts, and State Courts of Last Resort. 5
The Politics of Judicial Selection LO 16.3: Explain the process by which judges and justices are nominated and confirmed. The Lower Courts The Supreme Court The Politics of Judicial Selection The Lower Courts Senatorial Courtesy District court nominees are usually not confirmed if opposed by senator of the president s party from state the nominee will serve. Courts of appeal nominees are not confirmed when opposed by a senator of the president s party who is from the nominee s state. LO 16.3 The Politics of Judicial Selection LO 16.3 LO 16.3 The Supreme Court Through 2010, there have been 153 nominations to the Supreme Court, 112 people have served on the Court, and 29 failed to secure Senate confirmation. Presidents have failed 20% of the time to appoint the nominees of their choice to the Court. 6
LO 16.3 The Politics of Judicial Selection LO 16.3 The Supreme Court Nominations are likely to run into trouble if president (1) party is in the Senate minority, (2) makes a nomination at the end of their terms, (3) views are more distant from the norm in the Senate, and (4) nominee faces competence or ethics questions. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices : Describe the backgrounds of judges and justices and assess the impact of background on their decisions. Backgrounds of Federal Judges They are all lawyers (although this is not a constitutional requirement), and they are overwhelmingly white males. They have typically held office as a judge or prosecutor, and often they have been involved in partisan politics. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices Backgrounds of Federal Justices (cont.) All justices have been lawyers. All but 6 (Marshall, O Connor, Thomas, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan) have been white males. Most age 50s and 60s when they took office, from upper-middle or upper class, and Protestants. 7
The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices Backgrounds of Federal Justices (cont.) Most held high administrative or judicial positions. Most have experience as a judge at appellate level, and many worked for Justice Department. Some held elective office, had no government service, or had no previous judicial experience. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices Backgrounds of Federal Justices (cont.) Partisanship influences judicial selection. 13 of 112 members of the Supreme Court have been nominated by presidents of a different party. 90% of nominees are members of the president s party. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices Backgrounds of Federal Justices (cont.) Ideology influences judicial selection 13 nominees shared the president s ideology, but were not from president s party. Presidents want to appoint to the federal bench people who share their views because they want policies they agree with. The Courts as Policymakers : Outline the judicial process at the Supreme Court level and assess the major factors influencing decisions and their implementation. Accepting Cases Making Decisions Implementing Court Decisions The Courts as Policymakers Accepting Cases Requests for Supreme Court review (about 8,000 cases). Appeals discussed in conference. Appeal accepted that obtains four votes ( rule of 4 ) and denied if not (99% of cases are denied). When the Court agrees to hear a case, it issues a writ of certiorari (an order to the lower court to send up the case for review) Case placed on the docket (fewer than 100 cases/year). 8
If 4 justices agree to hear a case, the case will be heard by the entire court. Is the Supreme Court the only court with power to declare a law unconstitutional? The Courts as Policymakers Accepting Cases (cont.) Solicitor General 3 rd ranking Justice Department office and in charge of the court appeals made by the federal government. Decide what cases to appeal, review and modify the briefs, represent federal government before the Supreme Court, and submit amicus curiae briefs. The Courts as Policymakers Making Decisions Briefs submitted by both sides and amicus curiae briefs filed. Oral argument 1 hour hearing. Conference Discuss case, vote, and assign opinion writing. Opinions drafted and circulated for comments. Decision announced. 9
The Courts as Policymakers Making Decisions (cont.) Opinion Statement of legal reasoning behind a decision. Majority opinion 5 justices. Dissenting opinions Justices opposed to majority decision. Concurring opinions Support a majority decision but stress a different constitutional or legal basis for the judgment. Per Curiam - An opinion from a court that does not identify any specific judge who may have written the opinion. The Courts as Policymakers The Courts as Policymakers Making Decisions (cont.) Stare Decisis Phrase meaning let the decision stand. Most cases in appellate courts are settled on stare decisis. Precedent How similar cases have been decided in the past. Lower courts are expected to follow the precedents of higher courts in their decision making. Implementing Court Decisions Judicial implementation How and whether court decisions are translated into actual policy. Courts rely on other government units to enforce decisions. Judicial implementation involves the interpreting, implementing, and consumer populations. The Courts and Public Policy: An : Trace the Supreme Court s use of judicial review in major policy battles in various eras of American history. Policy Eras of Supreme Court Until the Civil War, dominant questions before the Court concerned slavery and strength and legitimacy of the federal government, and latter issues were resolved in favor of the supremacy of federal government. The Courts and Public Policy: An Policy Eras of Supreme Court (cont.) From the Civil War until 1937, questions of the relationship between the federal government and the economy predominated, and the Court restricted the power of the federal government to regulate the economy. 10
The Courts and Public Policy: An The Courts and Public Policy: An Policy Eras of Supreme Court (cont.) Since 1938, personal liberty and social and political equality questions have dominated, and the Court has enlarged the scope of personal freedom and civil rights and has removed many of the constitutional restraints on the regulation of the economy. John Marshall and the Growth of Judicial Review The Nine Old Men The Warren Court The Burger Court The Rehnquist and Roberts Courts The Courts and Public Policy: An The Courts and Public Policy: An John Marshall and the Growth of Judicial Review Marbury v. Madison (1803) The 1 st use of judicial review. Judicial review Power of the courts to determine whether acts of Congress and President are in accord with the Constitution. The Nine Old Men Schechter Poultry Corporation v. United States (1935) National Industrial Recovery Act was declared unconstitutional because it regulated purely local business that did not affect interstate commerce. The Courts and Public Policy: An The Warren Court Brown v. Board of Education In this 1954 case, the Court held that laws requiring segregation of the public schools were unconstitutional. 11
The Courts and Public Policy: An The Courts and Public Policy: An The Burger Court Roe v. Wade (1973) Decision holding that a state ban on all abortions was unconstitutional. U.S. v. Nixon (1974) Ordered Nixon to turn his White House tapes over to the courts. Rehnquist and Roberts Courts Bush v. Gore (2000) Decided the 2000 presidential election. McDonald v. Chicago (2010) The Court extended 2 nd Amendment s limits on restricting right to bear arms to state and local gun control laws. Understanding the Courts LO 16.7: Assess the role of unelected courts and the scope of judicial power in American democracy. The Courts and Democracy The Scope of Judicial Power Understanding the Courts The Courts and Democracy Courts are not very democratic because judges are not elected and are difficult to remove. The courts often reflect popular majorities and preferences. Groups are likely to use the courts when other methods fail, which promotes pluralism. LO 16.7 Understanding the Courts LO 16.7 Understanding the Courts LO 16.7 The Scope of Judicial Power Judicial restraint Judges play a minimal policymaking role. Judicial activism Judges make bold policy decisions and even chart new constitutional ground. Political questions How courts avoid deciding some cases. Statutory construction Courts interpret the act of Congress. 12
LO 16.7 LO 16.1 Nature of the Judicial The vast majority of cases are tried in state, not federal, courts. Courts can only hear cases or controversies between plaintiffs and defendants. Plaintiffs must have standing to sue, and judges can only decide justiciable disputes. LO 16.1 Who can challenge a law in an American court? LO 16.1 The Nature of the Judicial (cont.) Attorneys also play a central role in the judicial system. Interest groups sometimes promote litigation and often file amicus curiae briefs in cases brought by others. A. Any citizen can challenge any law. B. Any tax-paying citizen can challenge any law. C. Only a person who has a serious interest in a case can challenge a law. D. Only a lawyer can challenge a law. Who can challenge a law in an American court? LO 16.1 A. Any citizen can challenge any law. B. Any tax-paying citizen can challenge any law. C. Only a person who has a serious interest in a case can challenge a law. D. Only a lawyer can challenge a law. District courts have original jurisdiction and hear federal criminal, civil, diversity of citizenship, and bankruptcy cases, and handle admiralty and maritime, naturalization, and review the actions of some federal administrative agencies. 13
(cont.) Circuit courts hear appeals from the district courts and from many regulatory agencies. They focus on correcting errors of procedure and law that occurred in the original proceedings of legal cases. (cont.) The Supreme Court sits at the pinnacle of the system, deciding individual cases, resolving conflicts among the states, maintaining national supremacy in the law, and ensuring uniformity in the interpretation of national laws. Which of the following was actually specified in the U.S. Constitution? (cont.) Most Supreme Court cases come from the lower federal courts, but some are appeals from state courts and a very few are cases for which the Court has original jurisdiction. A. The Constitutional Courts B. The Court of Military Appeals C. The Tax Court D. The U.S. Supreme Court Which of the following was actually specified in the U.S. Constitution? A. The Constitutional Courts B. The Court of Military Appeals C. The Tax Court D. The U.S. Supreme Court LO 16.3 The Politics of Judicial Selection President nominates and Senate confirms judges and justices. Senators play an important role in the selection of lower court judges, as a result of senatorial courtesy, while the White House has more discretion with the Supreme Court justices. 14
LO 16.3 The Politics of Judicial Selection (cont.) Although the Senate confirms most judicial nominations, it has rejected or refused to act on many in recent years, especially for positions in the higher courts. Which of the following is NOT one of the different criteria that have been used for selecting judges and justices to the federal courts. A. competence B. income C. partisanship D. ideology LO 16.3 Which of the following is NOT one of the different criteria that have been used for selecting judges and justices to the federal courts. A. competence B. income C. partisanship D. ideology LO 16.3 The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices Judges and justices are not a representative sample of the American people. They are all lawyers and are disproportionately white males. The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices (cont.) They usually share the partisan and ideological views of the president who nominated them, and these views are often reflected in their decisions. Other characteristics such as race and gender are also seen to influence decisions. All of the following are true of the backgrounds of federal judges EXCEPT they typically A. have been white males. B. have been from the appointing president s region of the country. C. share the appointing president s political party affiliation. D. share the appointing president s ideology. 15
All of the following are true of the backgrounds of federal judges EXCEPT they typically A. have been white males. B. have been from the appointing president s region of the country. C. share the appointing president s political party affiliation. D. share the appointing president s ideology. The Courts as Policymakers Accepting cases is a crucial stage in Supreme Court decision making, and the Court is most likely to hear cases on major issues, when it disagrees with lower court decisions, and when the federal government, as represented by the solicitor general, asks for a decision. The Courts as Policymakers (cont.) Decisions are announced once justices have written opinions. Judicial implementation depends on the interpreting (judges and lawyers), implementing (the other units of government), and consumer (citizens affected by decision) populations. Under which scenario is the Court most likely to decide to accept a case? A. When at least three justices decide the case has merit. B. When the justices have help read numerous appeals. C. When the case is appealed from a state supreme court. D. When the Solicitor General s Office decides to appeal a case the government has lost in lower court. Under which scenario is the Court most likely to decide to accept a case? A. When at least three justices decide the case has merit. B. When the justices have help read numerous appeals. C. When the case is appealed from a state supreme court. D. When the Solicitor General s Office decides to appeal a case the government has lost in lower court. The Courts and Public Policy: An Until the Civil War, the dominant questions before the Court concerned slavery and the strength and legitimacy of the federal government, with the latter questions resolved in favor of the supremacy of the federal government. 16
The Courts and Public Policy: An (cont.) From the Civil War until 1937, questions of the relationship between the federal government and the economy predominated, with the Court restricting the government s power to regulate the economy. The Courts and Public Policy: An (cont.) From 1938 until the present, the key issues before the Court have concerned personal liberty and social and political equality. The Court has enlarged the scope of personal freedom and civil rights and has removed many of the constitutional restraints on the regulation of the economy. Judicial review was established by John Marshall and his associates in. Judicial review was established by John Marshall and his associates in. A. Marbury v. Madison (1803) B. Schechter Poultry Corporation v. U.S. (1935) C. U.S. v. Nixon (1974) D. Bush v. Gore (2000) A. Marbury v. Madison (1803) B. Schechter Poultry Corporation v. U.S. (1935) C. U.S. v. Nixon (1974) D. Bush v. Gore (2000) LO 16.7 Understanding the Courts Judges and justices are not elected, are hard to remove, are not totally insulated from politics, and have promoted openness in political system. They have a number of tools for avoiding making controversial decisions, and the president and Congress have means they can use to overturn Court decisions. A judicial philosophy in which judges play minimal policymaking roles, leaving that duty strictly to the legislatures. A. political questions B. statutory construction C. judicial activism D. judicial restraint LO 16.7 17
LO 16.7 A judicial philosophy in which judges play minimal policymaking roles, leaving that duty strictly to the legislatures. Text Credits Judicial Process, 7e by Abraham (1998) Table 9 p. 309. By permission of Oxford University Press, Inc. Updated by the authors. A. political questions B. statutory construction C. judicial activism D. judicial restraint Photo Credits 466: Joe Sohm/The Image Works 467T: Carol Iwasaki/Getty Images 466TC: Reuters/New Media/Corbis 467TB: AP Photos 467B: David Hume Kennerly/Getty Images 470: Iwasaki/Getty Images 478: Reuters/New Media/Corbis 480: White House handout/corbis 481: AP Photos 484: David Hume Kennerly/Getty Images 485: Joseph Mirachi/The New Yorker Collection/www.cartoonbank.com 486: Bettmann/Corbis 490: Supreme Court Historical 493T: Alex Wong/Getty Images 493B: Paul Conklin/PhotoEdit 494: By permission of Chuck Assay Creators Syndicate 18