the federal courts

The Federal CourtsThe Federal Courts

Chapter 16Chapter 16

Government in America: People, Politics, and PolicyUpdated with 15th Edition

Edwards/Wattenberg/Lineberry

The Nature of the Judicial The Nature of the Judicial SystemSystem

Introduction:Introduction: Two types of cases:Two types of cases:

Criminal Law: The government charges an Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific individual with violating one or more specific laws; robbery, rape, murder, etc.laws; robbery, rape, murder, etc.

Civil Law: The court resolves a dispute Civil Law: The court resolves a dispute between two parties and defines the between two parties and defines the relationship between them; divorce, relationship between them; divorce, violations of civil rights, law suits, etc.violations of civil rights, law suits, etc.

Most cases are tried and resolved in Most cases are tried and resolved in state, not federal courts.state, not federal courts.


Participants in the Judicial SystemParticipants in the Judicial System LitigantsLitigants

Plaintiff - the party bringing the chargePlaintiff - the party bringing the charge Defendant - the party being chargedDefendant - the party being charged

JuryJury - the people (normally 12)who - the people (normally 12)who decide the outcome of a casedecide the outcome of a case

Standing to sueStanding to sue: plaintiffs have a : plaintiffs have a serious interest in the case; have sustained or likely serious interest in the case; have sustained or likely to sustain a direct injury from the government; class to sustain a direct injury from the government; class action suits have expanded the idea of standing to action suits have expanded the idea of standing to suesue

Justiciable disputesJusticiable disputes: A case must be : A case must be capable of being settled as a matter of law.capable of being settled as a matter of law.


Participants in the Judicial SystemParticipants in the Judicial System GroupsGroups

NAACP, ACLU, etc.NAACP, ACLU, etc. Use the courts to try to change policiesUse the courts to try to change policies Amicus CuriaeAmicus Curiae briefs used to influence the courts briefs used to influence the courts

““friend of the court” briefs used to raise additional points friend of the court” briefs used to raise additional points of view and information not contained in briefs of formal of view and information not contained in briefs of formal partiesparties

AttorneysAttorneys 800,000 lawyers in United States today800,000 lawyers in United States today Legal Services Corporation: lawyers to assist the poor, Legal Services Corporation: lawyers to assist the poor,

funded by the federal governmentfunded by the federal government Access to quality lawyers is not equal.Access to quality lawyers is not equal.

Figure 16.1

The Structure of the Federal The Structure of the Federal Judicial SystemJudicial System

Structure of the Federal Judicial SystemStructure of the Federal Judicial System US Supreme Court was the ONLY court established by the US Supreme Court was the ONLY court established by the

Constitution. All other courts in the federal system were left to Constitution. All other courts in the federal system were left to the discretion of Congress to create. They did so through the the discretion of Congress to create. They did so through the Judiciary Act of 1789. These “Constitutional Courts” include 91 Judiciary Act of 1789. These “Constitutional Courts” include 91 district courts and 12 courts of appealdistrict courts and 12 courts of appeal

Legislative Courts: courts for specialized purposes: Court of Legislative Courts: courts for specialized purposes: Court of Military Appeals, Court of Claims, Court of International Trade, Military Appeals, Court of Claims, Court of International Trade, Tax CourtTax Court

JurisdictionJurisdiction:: OriginalOriginal: courts in which a case must be heard FIRST, usually in a : courts in which a case must be heard FIRST, usually in a

trial. They determine the facts in the case. Can be criminal or civil trial. They determine the facts in the case. Can be criminal or civil cases. 90% of cases start and end here.cases. 90% of cases start and end here.

AppellateAppellate: courts that hear cases brought to them on appeal from : courts that hear cases brought to them on appeal from the lower courts. They don’t review the facts of the case, just the the lower courts. They don’t review the facts of the case, just the legal issues involvedlegal issues involved


District Courts (91 federal courts)District Courts (91 federal courts) Original Jurisdiction: courts that hear the case Original Jurisdiction: courts that hear the case

first and determine the facts - the trial court. first and determine the facts - the trial court. ONLY federal court that holds trial and ONLY federal court that holds trial and empanels a juryempanels a jury

Deals with the following types of cases:Deals with the following types of cases: Federal crimesFederal crimes Civil suits under federal law or involving litigants Civil suits under federal law or involving litigants

across state lines (diversity of citizenship cases)across state lines (diversity of citizenship cases) BankruptcyBankruptcy Review some federal agenciesReview some federal agencies Admiralty and maritime law casesAdmiralty and maritime law cases Naturalization of aliensNaturalization of aliens


Courts of AppealCourts of Appeal Appellate Jurisdiction: reviews the legal issues in cases Appellate Jurisdiction: reviews the legal issues in cases

brought from lower courtsbrought from lower courts Hold no trials and hear no testimonyHold no trials and hear no testimony 12 circuit courts, 179 judges total, most cases heard by 12 circuit courts, 179 judges total, most cases heard by

a panel of 3 judges, decisions made by majority votea panel of 3 judges, decisions made by majority vote U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit – U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit –

specialized cases (patents, claims against the US, specialized cases (patents, claims against the US, international trade)international trade)

Focus on errors of procedure and lawFocus on errors of procedure and law Their decisions set precedent for all the courts and Their decisions set precedent for all the courts and

agencies within their jurisdictionagencies within their jurisdiction


The Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court Ensures uniformity in interpreting national Ensures uniformity in interpreting national

laws, resolves conflicts among states and laws, resolves conflicts among states and maintains national supremacy in lawmaintains national supremacy in law

9 justices – 1 Chief Justice, 8 Associate Justices9 justices – 1 Chief Justice, 8 Associate Justices Supreme Court decides which cases it will hearSupreme Court decides which cases it will hear

—controls its own agenda—controls its own agenda Some original jurisdiction, but mostly appellate Some original jurisdiction, but mostly appellate

jurisdictionjurisdiction Most cases come from the federal courtsMost cases come from the federal courts Most are civil casesMost are civil cases

US Supreme Court 2009US Supreme Court 2009

Front Row: Kennedy born 7/23/36 – Reagan, Stevens born 4/20/20 – Ford,

Chief Justice Roberts born 1/27/55 – GW Bush, Scalia born 3/11/36 – Reagan,

Souter born 9/17/39 – GHW Bush

Back Row: Breyer born 8/15/38 – Clinton, Thomas born 6/23/48 – GHW Bush,

Ginsburg born 3/15/33 – Clinton, Alito born 4/1/50 – GW Bush

Supreme Court 2012Supreme Court 2012

The Structure and Flow of the The Structure and Flow of the Federal Judicial SystemFederal Judicial System

The Politics of Judicial SelectionThe Politics of Judicial Selection

Presidents appoint members of the federal Presidents appoint members of the federal courts with “advice and consent” of the Senate.courts with “advice and consent” of the Senate.

The Lower CourtsThe Lower Courts Appointments handled through Appointments handled through Senatorial CourtesySenatorial Courtesy::

Unwritten tradition where a judge is not confirmed if a Unwritten tradition where a judge is not confirmed if a senator senator of the president’s partyof the president’s party from the state where the from the state where the nominee will serve opposes the nominationnominee will serve opposes the nomination

Has the effect of the president approving the Senate’s choiceHas the effect of the president approving the Senate’s choice President has more influence on appellate levelPresident has more influence on appellate level DOJ and FBI do background checks of initial DOJ and FBI do background checks of initial

nomineesnominees


The Supreme CourtThe Supreme Court Fewer constraints on president to Fewer constraints on president to

nominate persons to Supreme Courtnominate persons to Supreme Court President relies on attorney general and President relies on attorney general and

DOJ to screen candidatesDOJ to screen candidates 1 out of 5 nominees will not make it1 out of 5 nominees will not make it Presidents with minority party support in Presidents with minority party support in

the Senate will have more difficulty. the Senate will have more difficulty. Chief Justice can be chosen from a sitting Chief Justice can be chosen from a sitting

justice, or as a new member to the Courtjustice, or as a new member to the Court

The Backgrounds of Judges The Backgrounds of Judges and Justicesand Justices

Characteristics:Characteristics: Generally white males (4 women – O’Connor, Generally white males (4 women – O’Connor,

Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, 2 African Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan, 2 African Americans – Marshall and Thomas)Americans – Marshall and Thomas)

Lawyers with judicial and often political Lawyers with judicial and often political experienceexperience

Other Factors:Other Factors: Generally of the same party and ideology as Generally of the same party and ideology as

the appointing presidentthe appointing president Judges and justices may not rule the way Judges and justices may not rule the way

presidents had hoped they would have.presidents had hoped they would have.

Figure 16.4

The Courts as PolicymakersThe Courts as Policymakers

Accepting CasesAccepting Cases Use the “rule of four” to choose casesUse the “rule of four” to choose cases Issues a Issues a writ of certiorariwrit of certiorari to call up the case to call up the case Supreme Court accepts few cases each yearSupreme Court accepts few cases each year


Accepting Cases (continued)Accepting Cases (continued) The Solicitor General:The Solicitor General:

a presidential appointee and third-ranking a presidential appointee and third-ranking office in the Department of Justiceoffice in the Department of Justice

is in charge of appellate court litigation of the is in charge of appellate court litigation of the federal governmentfederal government

Four key functionsFour key functions Decide whether to appeal cases the government lostDecide whether to appeal cases the government lost Review and modify briefs presented in appealsReview and modify briefs presented in appeals Represent the government before the Supreme CourtRepresent the government before the Supreme Court Submit a brief on behalf of a litigant in a case in Submit a brief on behalf of a litigant in a case in

which the government is not directly involvedwhich the government is not directly involved

Figure 16.5


Making DecisionsMaking Decisions Oral arguments heard by the justicesOral arguments heard by the justices Justices discuss the caseJustices discuss the case One justice will write the One justice will write the majority opinionmajority opinion

(statement of legal reasoning behind a judicial (statement of legal reasoning behind a judicial decision) on the casedecision) on the case


Making Decisions (continued)Making Decisions (continued) Dissenting opinionsDissenting opinions are written by justices are written by justices

who oppose the majority.who oppose the majority. Concurring opinionsConcurring opinions are written in support of are written in support of

the majority but stress a different legal basis.the majority but stress a different legal basis. Stare decisisStare decisis: let previous decision stand : let previous decision stand

unchangedunchanged PrecedentPrecedent: how similar past cases were : how similar past cases were

decideddecided May be overruledMay be overruled

Original IntentOriginal Intent: the idea that the Constitution : the idea that the Constitution should be viewed according to the original should be viewed according to the original intent of the framersintent of the framers


Implementing Court DecisionsImplementing Court Decisions Judicial implementationJudicial implementation: how and : how and

whether court decisions are translated whether court decisions are translated into actual policy, thereby affecting the into actual policy, thereby affecting the behavior of othersbehavior of others

Must rely on others to carry out decisionsMust rely on others to carry out decisions Interpreting population: understand the decisionInterpreting population: understand the decision Implementing population: the people who need to Implementing population: the people who need to

carry out the decision – may be disagreementcarry out the decision – may be disagreement Consumer population: the people who are Consumer population: the people who are

affected (or could be) by the decisionaffected (or could be) by the decision

The Courts and the Policy The Courts and the Policy AgendaAgenda

A Historical ReviewA Historical Review John Marshall and the Growth of Judicial John Marshall and the Growth of Judicial

ReviewReview Marbury v. MadisonMarbury v. Madison (1803) established (1803) established

judicial review—courts determine judicial review—courts determine constitutionality of acts of Congressconstitutionality of acts of Congress

The “Nine Old Men” (New Deal Era)The “Nine Old Men” (New Deal Era) The Warren Court (1953-1969)The Warren Court (1953-1969) The Burger Court The Burger Court The Rehnquist Court (1990s)The Rehnquist Court (1990s)

Understanding the CourtsUnderstanding the Courts

The Courts and DemocracyThe Courts and Democracy Courts are not very democratic.Courts are not very democratic.

Not electedNot elected Difficult to remove judges and justicesDifficult to remove judges and justices

The courts often reflect popular majorities.The courts often reflect popular majorities. Groups are likely to use the courts when Groups are likely to use the courts when

other methods fail, which promotes other methods fail, which promotes pluralism.pluralism.

There are still conflicting rulings leading to There are still conflicting rulings leading to deadlock and inconsistency.deadlock and inconsistency.


What Courts Should Do: The Scope of What Courts Should Do: The Scope of Judicial PowerJudicial Power Judicial restraintJudicial restraint: judges should play a minimal : judges should play a minimal

policymaking rolepolicymaking role Judicial activismJudicial activism: judges should make bold : judges should make bold

policy decisions and even chart new policy decisions and even chart new constitutional groundconstitutional ground

Political questionsPolitical questions: means of the federal courts : means of the federal courts to avoid deciding some casesto avoid deciding some cases

Statutory constructionStatutory construction: the judicial : the judicial interpretation of an act of Congressinterpretation of an act of Congress

SummarySummary

Judicial policymaking and Judicial policymaking and implementation occur in lower implementation occur in lower federal and state courts.federal and state courts.

Many important questions are heard Many important questions are heard by the courts.by the courts. Much decision making is limited by Much decision making is limited by

precedent.precedent. Even the unelected courts promote Even the unelected courts promote

democratic values.democratic values.

the federal courts

Documents

federal law

federal judicial systemfigure

federal agenciesadmiralty

federal governmentaccess

federal courtschapter

federal system

constitutional courts

court briefs