1 / 25

The judiciary

The judiciary. Interpreting the law. 3 categories of law. Criminal Law-involve cases between the government and a defendant who-punishments usually consist of jail time and/or a fine

fynn
Download Presentation

The judiciary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The judiciary Interpreting the law

  2. 3 categories of law • Criminal Law-involve cases between the government and a defendant who-punishments usually consist of jail time and/or a fine • Civil Law-disputes between individuals and/or the government-the losers in these cases pay fines, not sent to jail; most of these cases are decided on the basis of precedent • Public Law-laws when the civil or criminal case involves the power of the government or rights of citizens as defined under the Constitution

  3. Organization of Federal Court System 7,500 50,000 250,000

  4. Federal Judicial Circuits

  5. The Supreme Court • 9 Justices-8 Associates, 1 Chief • Chief is an administrative title, has no real authority, but does assign decision writing • 3 functions of the Court • Resolve conflicts between states • Maintain national supremacy in the law • Ensure uniformity in the interpretation of the law • Court has original and appellate jurisdiction • Article III is short, why? Framers believed the best way to prevent encroachment by the federal government was the elected branches, not the Court

  6. Appointment process • President’s appoint justices, Senate approves • Typically justices are chosen who have federal court experience, share many of their political views and sometimes represent a region of the country • Once nominated, the Senate judiciary committee hold confirmation hearings and vote on approval • The hearings have typically fallen to partisan bickering • Hearings are not a fair evaluation of what the justice will be like on the bench

  7. Supreme Court perks • Office with a fireplace • Design their own robes (Rehnquist’s 3 gold stripes on each sleeve modeled after a Gilbert and Sullivan play) • $213,000/year salary • Gym with a basketball court on top floor “the highest court in the land” • Can use building as a catering place (Justice Kennedy held his daughters wedding reception there for 300+ guests)

  8. The Current Court Liberal Elena Kagan Stephen Breyer Sonia Sotomayor Ruth Bader Ginsburg Conservative Chief John Roberts Samuel Alito Antonin Scalia Clarence Thomas Moderate Anthony Kennedy

  9. 2010-11 Term decisions

  10. US Supreme Court 2009-10 Term

  11. Supreme Court Experience

  12. Justices do not have to say why Request from higher court to lower court to send a record up for review

  13. Majority opinion Concurring opinion Dissenting opinion Each side typically receives 30 minutes to argue their case

  14. Original intentions of Framers • Hamilton---Federalist No. 78 • “…no influence over the sword or the purse”, but the arbiter of the “will of the People.” • Who would ensure the government did not overstep its authority? Not Congress or President because by definition they were at the mercy of the people • The Courts authority, however, was to the Constitution, not the people, or Congress or President • “To avoid an arbitrary discretion in the courts, it is indispensable that they should be bound down by strict rules and precedents…in every particular cast that comes before them.” • But event Hamilton knew better

  15. Judicial Review-source of court’s power • Marbury v. Madison (1803) • Midnight judges by Adams in 1800, some commissions not delivered by order of Jefferson • Marbury files a writ of mandamus in Supreme Court because Judiciary Act of 1789 gives them the authority to review such cases • John Marshall (an Adams’ midnight appointment) rules that Court’s duty is to decide “what the law is”, overturns the Judiciary Act of 1789 and establishes the power of judicial review • Today, the Court uses it more vigorously than Framers intended

  16. Original intentions of Framers • Judicial activism-taking an active role in interpreting cases and “create” law in order to check others (loose interpretation) • Constitution should change over time • Judicial restraint-defer decisions to legislative and executive branches because they have more expertise (strict interpretation) • Constitution, i.e. the law, should stay same • Current conservatives of Court want to take Court backwards and undo the Liberal Court of 50’s-80’s • Maybe the Court does represent middle America, a majority of Americans may differ on abortion, but want it regulated, which the Court allows

  17. Checks against the Court • Executive Branch doesn’t have to enforce decisions and can control appointment process • Signing statements • bullypulpit • Legislative Branch appropriates the money, can pass constitutional amendments or rewrite the law overturned • The public can always ignore the decision • The Judicial Branch checks itself as well because of their own traditions and doctrines

  18. Development of the Court-Founding to Civil War • Court, under John Marshall’s guidance, is to decide the relationship between nation and state • Key cases: Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland • Marshall establishes many of the customs and traditions practiced by the Court today • He emphasized unanimity above all else and brought to Court “weight and dignity” • Chief Justice Taney continues traditions, but hurts Court’s reputation with Dred Scott decision

  19. Development of the Court-Civil War to Depression • Now Court ask to decide the relationship between government and business • Most of the Court was dominated by justices who had been lawyers for corporations, and therefore struck down laws regulating businesses such as child labor laws, anti-trust laws, unions, minimum wages • The dominance of this Court ended with FDR and his court packing plan Fuller Court White Court

  20. Development of the Court-Depression to the Present • During this time Court deciding the relationship between the government and the individual and selective incorporation • The Warren Court-Earl Warren was a 1953 Eisenhower appointee (one of his mistakes) who led the Court effectively and changed the direction of Court in the areas of racial segregation, criminal defendants rights’, and reapportionment • A very activist Court whose decisions favored minorities or “unpopular individuals” over government

  21. continued • Because of liberalism of Warren Court, Nixon vows to change Court and appoints Warren Burger in 1969 to lead a “constitutional counterrevolution” • Left most of Warren Court intact and expanded the law in sexual discrimination cases and abortion • Not as successful as hoped, but Reagan and Bush able to appoint 5 more conservatives in 12 years which worked to erode the Warren Court doctrine

  22. continued • The Rehnquist Court has not created the revolution in constitutional law, but has slowly chipped away at liberal decisions and no longer sees itself as the defender of individual liberties and civil rights • The Roberts Court has continued the tradition of Rehnquist, but has sought to create more unanimous decisions

More Related