Chapter 15The Courts

© 2009, Pearson Education

Fiorina, Peterson, Johnson, and MayerNew American Democracy, Sixth Edition

State CourtsFirst American courts were state courts

Under Articles no national judiciary

Constitution created national judiciary, but most legal cases still handled at state level

– Every state has its own judicial arrangements.

– Basic structure

• Trial courts, courts of appeals, court of last resort

• Decisions of state supreme courts may be appealed to the federal Supreme Court if the case involves a federal statute or the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

© 2009, Pearson Education

State Trial CourtsIn trials there are two sides:

– Plaintiff: person bringing the suit

– Defendant: person against whom the complaint is made

Trials settled alleged violations of the criminal and civil codes

– Civil code: regulates relations among individuals. Violators are sued by presumed victims, who ask the courts to award damages

– Criminal code: regulates relations between individuals and society. Alleged violators are prosecuted by the government

© 2009, Pearson Education

© 2009, Pearson Education

State Trial CourtsState courts are in a position to be influenced by politics

– In 39 of 50 states some judges are subject to election

– In others, they are appointed by state legislature, governor, or agency

Judicial campaigns are generally low key events.

Interest groups having more impact on judicial elections

© 2009, Pearson Education

Prosecuting State CasesProsecutors working for the local District

Attorney get info from police about criminal activity

DA determines whether evidence warrants presentation before a grand jury for prosecution

DA is responsible for prosecuting criminal cases

DA used as stepping stone to other offices

– Highly visible

– can be controversial

© 2009, Pearson Education

An Independent and Powerful Federal Judiciary

The court is able to be decisive because of the judiciary’s independence from other political institutions

It has the singular and long-established power to say what the Constitution means

Independence comes from:

– Life tenure

– Stable salaries

Independent but still affected by politics

© 2009, Pearson Education

Tenure and Salary

Founders believed life tenure for judges was essential to the system of separation of powers

Can only be removed by Congress

– Impeachment process

• Standards are very high

– May not lower salaries

– Questions as to judicial compensation: not kept pace with inflation

• shorter work hours

• job security

© 2009, Pearson Education

Judicial Review

Power of the courts to declare null and void laws of Congress and of state legislatures that they find unconstitutional

The Constitution affirms itself as “supreme law of the land” but says nothing explicit about judicial review

1803, S.C. asserted the power of judicial review

– Marbury v. Madison

– Decision asserted Court’s authority and lack of authority in certain areas

– Invoked the power of judicial review for the first time

© 2009, Pearson Education

Approaches to Constitutional Interpretation

Theory of Original Intent

– Determines the constitutionality of a law by ascertaining the intentions of those who wrote the Constitution

Living Constitution Theory

– Places the meaning of the Constitution in light of the total history of the United States

Plain-meaning-of-the-text theory

– Interprets the law in light of what the words of the Constitution obviously seem to say

© 2009, Pearson Education

Judicial Review in Practice

Manner in which the courts interpret the Constitution can have serious consequences for the nation

Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857)

– Court declared the Missouri Compromise unconstitutional

• said Congress could not prohibit slavery in the territories

• restriction on property rights

© 2009, Pearson Education

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Missouri CompromiseThe Dred Scott decision invalidated the Missouri Compromise, an 1820 agreement that averted a sectional crisis by fixing a line south of which slavery would be permitted. Areas north of the line would be free

Judicial Review in Practice

Lochner v. New York (1905)

Courts said the state of New York could not regulate the number of hours that bakers worked because it deprived them of the right to work as long and as hard as they liked

Oliver Wendell Holmes dissented

– Insisted the Constitution should be interpreted as a living document

© 2009, Pearson Education

Judicial Review in Practice

Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935)

Court found the national Industrial Recovery Act, which addressed labor and competition in the private sector, an unconstitutional intrusion on the power of the states to regulate commerce inside their own borders

At odds with president and congress

Stalemate resolved when several judges switched their votes

© 2009, Pearson Education

Judicial Review in Practice

Given these examples, is judicial review a bad thing?

– Is it undemocratic?

Some says yes, but others see judicial review as a valuable protection against majority infringement on minority civil rights and civil liberties

Seldom used

151 times between 1803 and 2000 Court declared a federal law unconstitutional.

© 2009, Pearson Education

Statutory InterpretationStatutory Interpretation

The judicial act of applying laws of Congress, rather than the Constitution, to specific cases

Example: Supreme Court heard case involving endangered species

– Nothing specific in the Constitution

– Had to apply 1973 law passed by congress. It was a bit vague.

– Court’s interpretation of the law gave it teeth. Said it was intended to protect all species.

– Did their interpretation match up to the intent of the law?

• cannot assume intentions—rather interpret what is there and apply it

© 2009, Pearson Education

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Federal Court System in PracticeMost of the work of the federal branch is

carried out by the lower-tier courts

District Courts

– Lowest level of the federal court system

– Courts in which most federal trials are held

Appeals Courts (Circuit Court of Appeals)

– Court to which decisions by federal district courts are appealed

© 2009, Pearson Education

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Federal Court System in PracticeSpecialized Courts

The Court of International Trade

– Handles cases concerning trade and customs

U.S. Court of Federal Claims

– Hears suits concerning federal contracts, money damages against the United States, and other issues that involve the federal government

© 2009, Pearson Education

Selection of Federal Judges

All federal judges hold lifetime positions after their nomination by the president and their confirmation by the Senate

Senatorial Courtesy:

– an informal rule that the Senate will not confirm nominees within or from a state unless they have the approval of the senior senator of that state from the president’s party

© 2009, Pearson Education

Deciding to Prosecute

Suspected violations of federal criminal code usually investigated by the FBI

U.S. Attorney

– Responsible for prosecuting violations of the federal criminal code

– Has very high political profile

© 2009, Pearson Education

Relations Between State and Federal Courts

Relationship vague under first few decades of the Constitution

Martin v. Hunter’s Lesee (1816)

– Supreme Court ruled it had the power to review and to overturn the decisions of state courts

McCulloch v. Maryland

– Decision (1819) in which the Supreme Court first declared a state law unconstitutional

Power to review state laws is essential for maintaining basic uniformity in the laws of the U.S.

Have found over 1,100 state statutes and constitutional provisions contrary to the federal Constitution

© 2009, Pearson Education

Relations Between State and Federal CourtsDouble jeopardy

Fifth Amendment prohibits double jeopardy (placing someone on trial for the same crime twice) but something similar to it can occur if a person is tried in both federal and state courts

Unusual

1995 bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma constituted a violation of both state laws against murder and federal laws against conspiracy and manslaughter

Rodney King example– Officers not found guilty at state level– Federal prosecutors brought charges and convicted

two of the four officers

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Supreme CourtSupreme Court sits at the top of a

pyramid of judicial activity

27 million criminal trials and civil suits

High Court decided only 76 cases

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Supreme Court: Process of Appointments

Process is a political one

– Nominated by the president

– Evaluated by the Senate Judiciary Committee and confirmed by a vote of the full Senate

First half of the 20th century, presidential nominations to the Court were confirmed by the Senate as matter of course

© 2009, Pearson Education

The Supreme Court: Process of Appointments

Since 1955, every Senate Court nominee has appeared before the judiciary committee

Since 1968, the Senate’s likelihood of rejecting presidential nominees has increased

Robert Bork, example

– created term borking: politicizing the nomination process through an organized public campaign that portrays the nominee as a dangerous extremist

© 2009, Pearson Education

© 2009, Pearson Education

Stare DecisisStare Decisis, “let the decision stand”

– In court rulings, reliance on consistency with precedents

Precedent

– Previous court decision or ruling applicable to a particular case

Legal distinction

– Legal difference between a case at hand and previous cases decided by the courts

© 2009, Pearson Education

CertsWrit of certiorari (cert)

Document issued by the Supreme Court indicating that the Court will review a decision made by a lower court

Court rejects most cert petitions (8,000 to 9,000 cases appealed each year)

Number of certs granted by Supreme Court has fallen recently

– 1970s as many as 400 cases annually

– 2005–05 court heard only 76 cases

Issuing cert requires the vote of 4 justices

– The case for cert is strong if two lower courts have reached opposite conclusions on cases in which the facts seem virtually identical

© 2009, Pearson Education

Role of Chief Justice

Supreme Court

Comprised of 8 associate justices and the Chief Justice

– Has only one vote

– Many tasks are of ceremonial or housekeeping nature

– Some responsibilities are influential

• assignment power

• Example: Warren and the Brown v. Board of Education opinion

© 2009, Pearson Education

Role of Solicitor General

Government official responsible for presenting before the Court the position of the presidential administration

Involvement of Solicitor General signals that the president and attorney general have strong views on the subject

Employed by the Justice Department

Reports to the AG

Chosen for legal skills

© 2009, Pearson Education

Role of Clerks

Perform much of the day-to-day work

Each justice has 2 to 4 clerks

Initially review certs

Also draft many opinions

© 2009, Pearson Education

Supreme Court Decision MakingBriefs submitted to the Court

Written statements presented to a court by lawyers on behalf

of clients

Justices listen to oral arguments in plenary session (all justices in attendance).

– Half hour for each side

Reach preliminary decision after oral argument in private conference

Express views and preliminary votes taken in order of seniority

If in majority, Chief Justice assigns the writing of the opinion; if in minority, senior justice in majority makes the assignment

Drafts are circulated and revisions made © 2009, Pearson Education

Supreme Court Decision Making

Dissenting opinion

– Written opinion presenting the reasoning of judges who vote against the majority

Concurring opinion

– A written opinion prepared by judges who vote with the majority but who wish either to disagree with, or to elaborate on, some aspect of the majority opinion

© 2009, Pearson Education

Supreme Court Decision Making

Once the court reaches a decision it sends (or remands) the case to lower court for implementation

Lower courts then apply the law accordingly

© 2009, Pearson Education

Voting on the Supreme Court

Judicial activism

– Doctrine that says the principle of stare decisis should sometimes be sacrificed in order to adapt the Constitution to changing conditions

Restorationist

– Judge who thinks that the only way the original meaning of the Constitution can be restored is by ignoring the doctrine of stare decisis

Judicial Restraint

– Doctrine that says courts should, if at all possible, avoid overturning a prior court decision

© 2009, Pearson Education

Checks on Court PowerConstitutional Amendment

Statutory Revision

– Wards Cove Packing Co. v. Antonio

Nonimplementation

© 2009, Pearson Education

Litigation as Political Strategy

Courts used by interest groups to place issues on the political agenda– Civil rights groups– Disabled Americans

Receiver– Official who has the authority to see that

judicial orders are carried out

Class Action Suit– Suit brought on behalf of all individuals in a

particular category whether or not they are actually participating in the suit

© 2009, Pearson Education