Chapter 11 and 12 - The Federal Court System SSCG16 The student will demonstrate knowledge of the operation of the federal judiciary. Powers of the Federal Courts Federal courts are generally created by the United States Congress under the constitutional power described in. These courts are much more independent of Congress and the. Article III requires the establishment of a and permits the Congress to create other federal courts, and place limitations on their jurisdiction. is the authority to hear certain cases. Federal courts have jurisdiction in cases that involve United States laws, with other countries, or interpretations of the Constitution. (Also hear cases involving bankruptcy & law) Jurisdiction Federal courts also have jurisdiction over cases involving certain persons: Ambassadors/representatives of or more state governments The US government or office/agency of who are residents of different states Citizens who are residents of the same state but claim lands under grants from states jurisdiction occurs when both state and federal court appear to have jurisdiction. Ex: A case involving citizens from different states in a dispute concerning more than. A person may sue in federal or state court but if the person being sued insists, the case must be tried in court. Original/Appellate The court in which a case is originally tried is known as a. A trial court has original jurisdiction. If a person loses a case in trial court and wishes to appeal the decision, he or she may take the case to the court with jurisdiction. If a person loses in the court of, he or she may appeal to the Supreme Court, (which has both original and appellate jurisdiction) Developing Supreme Court Power Early in the court s history, it was established that not the, nor any other federal court may initiate action. (A judge/justice cannot seek out an issue and request that the parties bring their case before the court) The court must wait for, those involved in a lawsuit, to come before them John Marshall John Marshall shaped American constitutional law and made the Supreme Court a center of. The longest serving in Supreme Court history, Marshall established that the courts are entitled to exercise, the power to strike down laws that violate the Constitution. He repeatedly confirmed the supremacy of federal law over state law and supported an expansive reading of the.
Due Process Following the Civil War, the Supreme Court issued several rulings on the Amendments. These amendments were intended to ensure the rights of newly freed African Americans, BUT the Court did not apply the of the 14th Amendment when individuals challenged business or state interests. The due process clause says that no state may deprive any person of liberty, or without the due process of law Landmark Cases Fletcher v. Peck (1810), was one of the first cases in which the Supreme Court ruled a state law. It is the earliest case of the Court asserting its right to invalidate conflicting with the Constitution Marbury v. is a landmark case in U.S. law. It formed the basis for the exercise of in the U.S. under Article III of the Constitution. Marbury v. Madison was the first time the declared something unconstitutional, and established the concept of judicial review in the U.S. (the idea that courts may oversee and nullify the actions of another branch of ). The landmark decision helped define the of the American form of government. Dred Scott v. Sandford was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as or their descendants whether or not they were slaves were not protected by the and could never be citizens of the United States. It also held that the United States Congress had no authority to prohibit in federal territories. The Court also ruled that because slaves were not citizens, they could not in court. Lastly, the Court ruled that slaves as could not be taken away from their owners without. The Slaughter-House Cases, (1873) was the first United States Supreme Court interpretation of the relatively new to the Constitution. It is viewed as a pivotal case in early law, reading the Fourteenth Amendment as protecting the "privileges or immunities" conferred by virtue of the United States citizenship to all individuals of all states within it. The 14th Amendment partially overturned the decision Plessy v. Ferguson, (1896), upheld the constitutionality of even in public accommodations (particularly railroads), under the doctrine of "separate but equal". remained standard doctrine in U.S. law until it was overturned with Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka in 1954 Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, (1954), overturned earlier rulings going back to Plessy v. Ferguson in 1896, by declaring that state laws that established separate for black and white students denied black children educational opportunities. As a result, de jure racial segregation was ruled a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States. This victory paved the way for and the
SSCG16 The student will demonstrate knowledge of the operation of the federal judiciary. Lower Federal Courts The Constitution created the and allowed for Congress to establish a network of lower federal courts as well. These courts are of 2 basic types: federal courts and legislative federal courts. The United States Judiciary Act of 1789 was a landmark adopted on September 24, 1789 in the first session of the First United States Congress establishing the U.S.. Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution prescribed that the of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court", and such inferior courts as Congress saw fit to establish. Constitutional Courts Courts established by Congress under the provisions of of the Constitution are constitutional courts. These courts include: federal district courts, the federal the U.S. Court of International Federal District Courts Congress created district courts in 1789 to serve as. As population grew and cases multiplied, Congress divided some states into more than one district. There are federal judicial districts, including at least one district in, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Three territories of the United States -- the Virgin Islands, Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands -- have district courts that hear federal cases, including The district courts have to hear nearly all categories of federal cases, including both and criminal matters. Every day hundreds of people across the nation are selected for and help decide some of these cases Juries Federal courts use 2 types of juries: and Grand jury has 16 23 people and hears evidence against the. If they think there is enough evidence, they pass an a formal accusation charging the person with a crime. The trial/petit jury has 6 12 people. They find the accused or innocent. In some states, they pass sentence on the. Courts of Appeals The U.S. judicial districts are organized into regional circuits, each of which has a United States court of appeals. A court of appeals hears appeals from the district courts located within its, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies Courts of appeals have only jurisdiction. Most appeals arise from decisions of district courts, the U.S. and various territorial courts. These courts also hear appeals on the rulings of agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission or the Federal Communications Commission.
Courts of appeals may decide an appeal in one of 3 ways: Uphold the decision that decision Or send it back to the lower court to be tried again. Unless appealed to the Supreme Court, the appeals court decision is. A special court of appeals called the United States Court of Appeals for the Circuit was created by with passage of the Federal Courts Improvement Act of 1982 making the judges of the former courts into circuit judges. It is housed in The United States Court of Federal Claims hears non-tort monetary claims against the. It hears claims for money that arise from the United States Constitution, federal statutes, executive regulations, or an express or implied contract with the United States Government. The specializes in adjudicating disputes over federal income tax, generally prior to the time at which the formal tax assessments are made by the The is the only forum in which taxpayers outside of bankruptcy may do so without having first paid the disputed tax in full. Tax Court judges are appointed for a term of years, subject to removal for cause. The United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces exercises worldwide jurisdiction over members of the United States armed forces on active duty and other persons subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Selection of Federal Judges of the Constitution provides that the president, with consent of the Senate, appoints all federal judges. Judges in constitutional courts are to serve for life. What advantages/disadvantages (political) would there be for a judge to be appointed for life? Party Affiliation/Political Philosophy Presidents favor judges who belong to their own Because judges are appointed for life, presidents view the are a way to ensure their political ideas will continue even after they Senatorial allows that the president submit the name of the judicial candidate to the senators from the candidate s state before submitting to the entire for approval. If either or both senators oppose the nominee, the president usually withdraws that nomination.
The U.S. Supreme Court The Supreme Court of the United States is the judicial body in the United States. It consists of the of the United States and Associate Justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed with the of the Senate. Once appointed, Justices effectively have life tenure, serving "during good Behavior, which terminates only upon death, resignation, retirement, or conviction on impeachment. The Court meets in Washington, D.C. in the United States Supreme Court building. The Supreme Court is primarily an, but it has original jurisdiction over a small range of cases The Constitution specifies that the Supreme Court may exercise jurisdiction in cases affecting ambassadors and other diplomats, and in cases in which a state is a party. In all other cases, however, the Court has only appellate jurisdiction. It considers cases based on its original jurisdiction very rarely; almost all cases are brought to the Supreme Court on In practice, the only original jurisdiction cases heard by the Court are disputes between two or more states. How do they decide to hear a case? The Supreme Court decides to hear a case on three major factors. Whether it was an by the federal court and is in conflict with the decisions of other circuits, the general of the case, and whether the lower court's decisions may be in light of the Supreme Court's opinions. A petition for a writ of certiorari is the documentation sent to the Supreme Court of the United States to request that they a case. A writ of certiorari ("to be informed") is issued from any court (the Supreme Court is the highest appellate court) to a lower court requesting more information about a case - seeking judicial review. Once the Supreme Court accepts a case, the lawyers give the Court lengthy, detailed documents called arguing their points and providing legal support for them. Next, the typically argue the merits of their cases orally before the Supreme Court (which the public is welcome to attend). The Court considers these briefs and arguments in researching and deciding the cases. After the lawyers complete their, the justices debate the case. Usually about minutes per case then they vote. A majority of the justices must be in agreement. The states the facts of the case. The opinions are as important as the decision itself. They set a for the lower courts to follow in future cases and gives the public an explanation for their decision. There are 4 different opinions: Unanimous,, concurring, and Unanimous: all justices vote the same way (only about 1/3 of the decisions are unanimous) : expresses the views of a majority of the justices Concurring: one or more of the justices agree with the majority s conclusions on the case, but for different reasons Dissenting: opinion of the justices on the. The philosophy of is the charge that judges are going beyond their appropriate powers and engaging in making law and not merely interpreting it. Judicial activism is a critical term used by some to describe judicial rulings that they feel are based more upon the judge's personal bias than by existing law. Judicial restraint encourages to limit the exercise of their own power. It asserts that judges should hesitate to strike down laws unless they are obviously unconstitutional.