The Federal Courts

Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Longman.

Edwards, Wattenberg, and Lineberry

Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy

Fourteenth Edition

The Nature of the Judicial System

• Introduction:
• Two types of cases:
• Criminal Law: The government charges an individual with violating one or more specific laws.
• Civil Law: The court resolves a dispute between two parties and defines the relationship between them.
• Most cases are tried and resolved in state, not federal courts.
• Cases of burglary or divorce

The Nature of the Judicial System

• Participants in the Judicial System
• Litigants
• Plaintiff—the party bringing the charge
• Defendant—the party being charged
• Jury—the people (normally 12) who often decide the outcome of a case
• Standing to sue: plaintiffs have a serious interest in the case; have sustained or likely to sustain a direct injury from the government
• Justiciable disputes: a case must be capable of being settled as a matter of law.

The Nature of the Judicial System

• Participants in the Judicial System
• Groups
• Use the courts to try to change policies
• Amicus Curiae briefs used to influence the courts
• “friend of the court” briefs used to raise additional points of view and information not contained in briefs of formal parties
• Attorneys
• 800,000 lawyers in United States today
• Legal Services Corporation: lawyers to assist the poor
• Access to quality lawyers is not equal.

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

• District Courts (91 federal courts)
• Original Jurisdiction: courts that hear the case first and determine the facts - the trial court
• Deals with the following types of cases:
• Federal crimes
• Civil suits under federal law and across state lines
• Supervise bankruptcy proceedings
• Review actions of some federal agencies
• Admiralty and maritime law cases
• Supervision of naturalization of aliens

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

• Courts of Appeal
• Appellate Jurisdiction: reviews the legal issues in cases brought from lower courts
• Hold no trials and hear no testimony
• 12 circuit courts
• U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit – specialized cases
• Focus on errors of procedure and law

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

• The Supreme Court
• Ensures uniformity in interpreting national laws, resolves conflicts among states and maintains national supremacy in law
• 9 justices – 1 Chief Justice, 8 Associate Justices
• Supreme Court decides which cases it will hear—controls its own agenda
• Some original jurisdiction, but mostly appellate jurisdiction
• Most cases come from the federal courts
• Most are civil cases

The Structure of the �Federal Judicial System

The Structure of the Federal Judicial System

The Politics of Judicial Selection

• Presidents appoint members of the federal courts with “advice and consent” of the Senate.
• The Lower Courts
• Appointments handled through Senatorial Courtesy:
• Unwritten tradition where a judge is not confirmed if a senator of the president’s party from the state where the nominee will serve opposes the nomination
• Has the effect of the president approving the Senate’s choice
• President has more influence on appellate level

The Politics of Judicial Selection

• The Supreme Court
• Fewer constraints on president to nominate persons to Supreme Court
• President relies on attorney general and DOJ to screen candidates
• 1 out of 5 nominees will not make it
• Presidents with minority party support in the Senate will have more difficulty.
• Chief Justice can be chosen from a sitting justice, or as a new member to the Court

The Politics of Judicial Selection

The Backgrounds of �Judges and Justices

• Characteristics:
• Generally white males
• Lawyers with judicial and often political experience
• Other Factors:
• Generally of the same party and ideology as the appointing president
• Judges and justices may not rule the way presidents had hoped they would have.

The Backgrounds of Judges and Justices

Current Justices �of the Supreme Court

Current Justices �of the Supreme Court

The Courts as Policymakers

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

The Courts as Policymakers

• Accepting Cases (continued)
• The Solicitor General:
• a presidential appointee and third-ranking office in the Department of Justice
• is in charge of appellate court litigation of the federal government
• Four key functions:
• Decide whether to appeal cases the government lost
• Review and modify briefs presented in appeals
• Represent the government before the Supreme Court
• Submit a brief on behalf of a litigant in a case in which the government is not directly involved

The Courts as Policymakers

• Making Decisions
• Oral arguments heard by the justices
• Justices discuss the case
• One justice will write the majority opinion (statement of legal reasoning behind a judicial decision) on the case

The Courts as Policymakers

• Making Decisions (continued)
• Dissenting opinions are written by justices who oppose the majority.
• Concurring opinions are written in support of the majority but stress a different legal basis.
• Stare decisis: let previous decision stand unchanged
• Precedent: how similar past cases were decided
• May be overruled
• Original Intent: the idea that the Constitution should be viewed according to the original intent of the framers

The Courts as Policymakers

• Judicial implementation
• How and whether court decisions are translated into actual policy, thereby affecting the behavior of others
• Must rely on others to carry out decisions
• Interpreting population: understand the decision
• Implementing population: the people who need to carry out the decision–may be in disagreement
• Consumer population: the people who are affected (or could be) by the decision

The Courts and the Policy Agenda

• A Historical Review
• The Marshall Court (1801-1835)

(John Marshall and the Growth of Judicial Review)

• Marbury v. Madison (1803) established judicial review—courts determine constitutionality of acts of Congress
• The “Nine Old Men” (FDR & the New Deal)
• The Warren Court (1953-1969)
• The Burger Court (1969-1986)
• The Rehnquist Court (1986-2005)
• The Roberts Court (2005-Present)

Understanding the Courts

• The Courts and Democracy
• Courts are not very democratic.
• Not elected
• Difficult to remove judges and justices
• The courts often reflect popular majorities.
• Groups are likely to use the courts when other methods fail, which promotes pluralism.
• There are still conflicting rulings leading to deadlock and inconsistency.

Understanding the Courts

• What Courts Should Do: The Scope of Judicial Power
• Judicial restraint: judges should play a minimal policymaking role
• Judicial activism: judges should make bold policy decisions and even chart new constitutional ground
• Political questions: means of the federal courts to avoid deciding some cases
• Statutory construction: the judicial interpretation of an act of Congress

Understanding the Courts

Summary

• Judicial policymaking and implementation occur in lower federal and state courts.
• Many important questions are heard by the courts.
• Much decision making is limited by precedent.
• Even the unelected courts promote democratic values.