today’s agenda becky presentation zach presentation begin judicial branch homework –look over...
TRANSCRIPT
Today’s Agenda• Becky presentation
• Zach presentation
• Begin Judicial Branch
• Homework– Look over Legislative Branch
notes– Work on Current Event
The Judicial Branch • What do you know? • What do you want to
know?
Objectives• What is the Judicial Branch?
• How does it work?
• What is jurisdiction?
• How is the Federal District Court System organized?
• How long can a judge remain in office?
• Describe the Supreme Court.
Article III of US Constitution
The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress many from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior…
What is the Judicial Branch of our government?
• Branch of government that “judges” & interprets the law
• Federal Court
– Supreme Court
– Court of appeals
– District Courts
So if Jackson is accused of doing something wrong, will he end up in front of
the Supreme Court?• Not necessarily. It depends on the kind of law
he broke and jurisdiction.
What is jurisdiction?• power and right to judge a legal matter• Depends on where and the kind of crime or dispute in
question• State Courts
– Laws passed by state (education, marriage/divorce)– Traffic and parking tickets– Family disputes– Small claims– About 50 million cases per year
• Federal Courts– Matters involving US Constitution– Laws passed by Congress– Cases involving people from different states– About 2 million cases per year
How is the Federal District Court System organized?
• Made up of:– District Courts
• Have judge and juries– Appellate Courts
• Court of Appeals• Courts where accused ask
higher court to review a case because that believe the judgment was unfair
– The Supreme Court• The final appeals court• Hear cases that deal with the
constitutionality of a judgment or law
Describe Brown v Board of Education case of 1954.
• Supreme Court decision that banned segregation in schools
• Linda Brown sued school district of Topeka, Kansas (State Court)
• Supreme Court said that segregation in schools violated 14th Amendment
• Lost in district court of Kansas– Cited Plessy v Ferguson
“separate but equal” ruling• Supreme Court ruled that
segregation in schools is unequal
How long can a judge remain in office?
• Article III says
• shall hold their offices during good behavior
• For life
• Why?
• So that decisions not influenced by whims of the masses– What’s popular is not
always what’s right!
Describe the Supreme Court.• Made up of 9 justices
• Appointed by president
• Approved by senate
• Serve for life
• Powers– Final appellate court– Judicial review
• Power to decide if law is constitutional
• “created” in Marbury v Madison case of 1803
How are decisions reached in the Supreme Court?
• Decisions reached by majority vote– Majority Opinion
• Carefully worded legal reasoning why the court decided a case in a certain way
– Dissenting Opinion• Carefully worded legal
reasoning why certain justice(s) disagree with the rest
But in view of the constitution, in the eye of the law, there is in this country no superior, dominant, ruling class of citizens. There is no caste here. Our constitution is color-blind, and neither knows nor tolerates classes among citizens. In respect of civil rights, all citizens are equal before the law. The humblest is the peer of the most powerful.Justice John Marshal Harlan, Dissenting opinion in Plessy v Ferguson (1896)
So who are these guys that have so much power and get to keeps their jobs for life? Where
politically do they lean?
Supreme Project
• In Groups of 3 go to http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx
Our Supreme Court is cooler than yours Canada
John Roberts• Chief Justice • Appointed by George
W. Bush.• Took his seat on High
Court on 9/25/05.• Graduate of Harvard
and Harvard Law• Age 60• Right leaning….
Antonin Scalia
• Appointed by Ronald Reagan.
• Took his seat on the High Court on 9/26/86.
• Graduate of Georgetown and Harvard Law.
• Age 78• RIGHT leaning….
Clarence Thomas• Appointed by
George HW Bush.• Took his seat on the
High Court on 10/23/91.
• Graduate of Holy Cross and Yale Law
• Age 66• RIGHT leaning….
Samuel Alito
• Appointed By George W. Bush.
• Took his seat on the High Court on 1/31/06.
• Graduate of Princeton and Yale Law.
• Age 65• Right leaning….
Anthony Kennedy• Appointed by Ronald
Reagan.• Took his seat on the High
Court on 2/18/88.• Graduated from Stanford
and Harvard Law.• Born Age 78• Moderate….
Ruth Bader Ginsburg• Appointed by
William Clinton.• Took her seat on the
High Court on 8/10/93.
• Graduate of Cornell and Columbia Law.
• Born Age 82• LEFT leaning….
Stephen Breyer• Appointed by William
Clinton.• Took his seat on the
High Court on 8/3/94• Graduate of Stanford
and Harvard Law.• Age 77• LEFT leaning….
Sonia Sotomayor• Appointed by
Barack Obama• Took her seat on the
High Court on 8/8/2009
• Graduate of Princeton and Yale Law
• Age 60• Left Leaning…
Elena Kagan• Appointed by
Barack Obama• Graduated from
Princeton and Harvard law
• Age 55• Took her seat on the
high court on 8/7/2010
• Left Leaning…
Who leans which way?
Fun with Cases• Miranda is one of the best-known
cases in the history of the Supreme Court. It represents the Court's determination to treat even the lowliest of criminals with the same dignity and respect as the wealthiest celebrity. Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Phoenix and taken directly to the police station. A victim of rape and kidnapping identified him as the perpetrator. The police then brought Miranda into the interrogation room, questioned him for two hours, and received a signed confession. The police had never advised Miranda of his right to an attorney or the fact that anything he said could be used against him in a court of law.
• The Supreme Court still found in favor of him, holding that "the defendant's confession was inadmissible because he was not in any way informed of his right to council nor was his privilege against self-incrimination effectively protected in any other manner."
• 5-4 Miranda v. Arizona 1966
Fun with Cases• The police, acting on a tip that
Billy Greenwood was dealing in illegal narcotics, searched trash bags out on his curb. Finding paraphernalia associated with drug use in the garbage bags, the police applied for a search warrant; they included in their affidavits descriptions of what they had found in the garbage. Based on evidence from both the garbage can and the subsequent search, Greenwood was convicted of drug-related charges. He appealed to the Supreme Court, claiming that the search of his garbage was warrantless and therefore illegal.
• The Supreme Court upheld the search, claiming that the bags of trash left on the side of the street were open to inspection by "animals, children, scavengers, snoops, and other members of the public." Justices Marshall and Brennan dissented, reasoning the search of another person's garbage did not constitute civilized behavior, and therefore a person has the right to expect that the contents of any opaque container thrown out or transported will remain private. Nevertheless, the garbage was ruled public domain and the evidence was admissible.
• 6-2 California v. Greenwood 1988
Fun with Cases• This case concerns the right of the
police to search in the vicinity of an arrest. It involved a man who had been burglarizing a specific area for quite some time. The police knew this and swore out a warrant for his arrest. Upon arresting him, they searched his apartment and discovered evidence that implicated him in the crimes. The search, however was done without a warrant. The police argued that they had merely followed the law which allowed them to search within the vicinity of an arrest in order to prevent escape, the destruction of evidence, or the acquisition of a weapon.
• The Court upheld the search, arguing "the area in which an arrestee might reach in order to grab a weapon or evidentiary items must, of course, be governed by a like rule. A gun on a table or in a drawer in front of one who is arrested can be as dangerous to the arresting officer as one concealed in the clothing of the person arrested. There is ample justification, therefore, for a search of the arrestee's person and the area 'within his immediate control.'"
• 6-3 Chimel v. California 1969
Fun with Cases• One night, seven police officers
broke into and searched Dolly Mapp's home in Clevleand, Ohio. The search was prompted by an informant telling them that a suspect in a recent bombing was hiding out there. Mapp's house was searched, and no sign of the suspect was found; however, police did find some literature deemed obscene (the possession of which was a crime). Although the police claimed to have a search warrant, but none was produced. In court, their search was upheld and Dolly Mapp was convicted of the possession of obscene material-it was appealed to the supreme court.
• The Supreme Court overturned this conviction on the grounds that the search was illegal. The Mapp case incorporated the 4th amendment into the Due Process clause of the 14th amendment and created the "exclusionary rule," which prevents the use of evidence gained by these so-called illegal searches. Opponents of the exclusionary rule argue "the criminal is to go free because the constable has blundered," to which Justice Clark answered "The criminal goes free if he must, but it is the law that sets him free.“
• 5-3 Mapp v. Ohio 1961
Fun with Cases• Eddie Dean Griffin had been accused
of assaulting and murdering a female friend of his. To these charges, he plead not guilty. Griffin's counsel recommended that he not testify on the grounds that the prosecution's case was entirely circumstantial. During the trial, the prosecutor brought into evidence the fact that Griffin had been seen in the alley where the victim was found and had left it "cool as a cucumber". The main thrust of his closing statement, however, concerned the defendant's refusal to testify. The jury found Griffin guilty and sentenced him to death. Griffin appealed the case on the grounds that he was denied his Fifth Amendment right refrain from testifying as a defense.
• The Supreme Court found in his favor. They reasoned that by referring to the defendant's lack of testimony in front of the jury, the prosecution denied him his Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The Court went on to say what the jury "may infer when the court solemnizes the silence of the accused into evidence against him is [dangerous]."
• 7-2 Griffin v. California 1965
Fun with Cases
• Katz was arrested for illegal gambling after using a public phone to transmit "gambling information." The FBI had attached an electronic listening/recording device onto the outside of the public phone booth that Katz habitually used. They argued that this constituted a legal action since they never actually entered the phone booth.
• The Court, however, ruled in favor of Katz, stating the Fourth Amendment allowed for the protection of a person and not just a person's property against illegal searches. Whatever a citizen "seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected."
• 7-1 Katz v. United States 1967
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Legal Precedents
• Perhaps most important legal principle affecting judicial decisions is stare decisis – Latin for “to let the decision stand” – once the Court makes a ruling on one case, that becomes a precedent, or model, to decide similar cases in the future • Reasons for the importance of stare decisis – • it makes for fair, uniform decisions • it makes the law more predictable • it enables the courts to be more efficient – judges don’t have to establish all-new rulings for every case they hear
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Judicial Philosophies
• Judges legal and personal philosophies play a part in their decision-making, which leads to controversy – • Should the Court simply act as referee, making sure Congress and President play by the constitutional rules? or… • Should the Court be an active player, taking a vigorous role in setting policies?
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Judicial Philosophies
Judicial restraint – • the view that judicial decisions should not contradict the wishes of the elected members of government – the President and Congress – unless their actions clearly violate specific provisions of the Constitution • Example: Justice Felix Frankfurter stated during the 1940s that “…one’s own opinion about the wisdom or evil of a law should be excluded altogether when one is doing one’s duty on the bench.”
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Judicial PhilosophiesJudicial activism – • the view that Supreme Court justices should take an active role in making policy, even if it means going beyond the actions of the elected branches of government • Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes said once, “…the Constitution is what the judges say it is.” • this view made possible the ruling against segregated public schools in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), expanding the rights of persons accused of crimes (Miranda v. Arizona, 1966), and upholding freedom of speech, press, opinion, and other rights in the Bill of Rights during conservative assaults on those rights
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Judicial activism, cont. • Judicial activism is a philosophy held by both conservatives and liberals, depending on the case and how passionately they personally react to it – • The Court’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) made it clear that the conservative majority of five Republican appointees could be “judicial activists” – by reversing decades of precedent, going against the principle of stare decisis, and declaring a new right, entirely, by a 5-4 decision, that persons have an individual constitutional right to possess firearms, declaring unconstitutional a handgun-control ban in the District of Columbia
Judicial Philosophies
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court DecisionsPublic Opinion
• Justices are not isolated from the pressures of public opinion – they are human beings who read newspapers, receive mail, converse with friends and family They can never totally ignore public opinion – it’s a reflection of their legitimacy in the eyes of the public The people’s acceptance of authority, as being right, correct, and appropriate, is legitimacy – and the Court does not have any police force of its own to enforce its decisions Without legitimacy, the Court’s rulings would be meaningless
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Checks and Balances
Presidential appointments – • In making decisions, the Court also responds to the influence of the other two branches of government – the President and Congress • Presidents have the power of appointing justices – in fact, all federal judges – and they appoint justices whose views mirror their own
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Checks and Balances
Roosevelt’s “court-packing” scheme – • Franklin Roosevelt, a liberal, inherited from past presidents a conservative Supreme Court – it regularly declared unconstitutional the New Deal laws FDR had passed through Congress to deal with Great Depression – frustrating FDR greatly • FDR asked Congress to pass a law expanding the Court from 9 to 15 total members – so he could “pack” the Court with more liberal justices • Public opinion was strongly against this – felt FDR was trying to be a dictator • Congress refused FDR’s request
Checks and Balances
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Cartoonist’s view of FDR’s court-packing plan
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Checks and Balances
The role of Congress – • Senate confirms (or not) presidential appointments to Supreme Court • Congress sets pay of all federal judges • Congress appropriates funds to maintain federal courts system • Congress can alter size of Supreme Court • Congress can change the types of cases over which Supreme Court has jurisdiction
Many Factors Influence Supreme Court Decisions
Checks and Balances
Constitutional amendments – • Congress can pass constitutional amendments to overturn Supreme Court decisions – • Eleventh Amendment was passed after Court’s decision in Chisholm v. Georgia (1793) • 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were passed, in part, as a congressional reaction to the Court’s ruling in the Dred Scott case (1857), invalidating the Missouri Compromise and denial of Scott’s citizenship rights in Dred Scott v. Sanford • Sixteenth Amendment was passed when Court nullified income tax law in 1895
Review• What are the advantages of following precedent? • Under what conditions would the Supreme Court depart from
stare decisis? • What role does the Supreme Court play under the philosophy
of judicial restraint? Under the philosophy of judicial activism?
• Why is public opinion so important to the decision-making process of the Supreme Court?
• Why did President Roosevelt’s court-packing plan fail? • What are some ways Congress can influence the Supreme
Court? • Which constitutional amendments have been passed as
congressional reactions to Supreme Court rulings?