Judicial branch
Download
1 / 58

Judicial Branch - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 229 Views
  • Uploaded on

Judicial Branch. All true statements about the courts:. The great bulk of American legal business is transacted in the less-noticed courts . The Supreme Court decides a handful of key issues each year. Supreme Court decision may directly shape people’s lives.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Judicial Branch' - elon


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

All true statements about the courts
All true statements about the courts:

  • The great bulk of American legal business is transacted in the less-noticed courts.

  • The Supreme Court decides a handful of key issues each year.

  • Supreme Court decision may directly shape people’s lives.

  • Federal courts do not hear hypothetical cases.


  • Standing to sue: must have a serious personal stake in the case, typically determined by whether or not they have sustained or are in danger of an injury.

  • Class action suits: permit a small number of people to sue on behalf of all other people similarly situated.



  • Courts of original jurisdiction are trial courts.

  • Courts with appellate jurisdiction review the legal issues involved in a case.

  • The Court of Claims is a legislative court


  • Most criminal and civil cases never reach trial, but are settled out of court.

  • The vast majority of all civil and criminal cases begin and end in state courts.



  • Most cases heard by the Supreme Court come the from civil actions from lower federal courts.

  • The U.S. Supreme Court’s jurisdiction includes appellate jurisdiction from both state and federal courts.

  • In its investigation of Supreme Court nominees, the Senate Judiciary Committee may probe a nominee’s judicial philosophy in great detail.


  • The functions of the Supreme Court include each of the the following:

  • ensuring uniformity in the interpretation of national laws.

  • maintaining national supremacy in the law.

  • resolving conflicts among the states.

  • hearing cases involving federal questions from state supreme courts.


  • Senatorial courtesy: the

  • When there is a vacancy for a federal judgeship, the relevant senator will suggest one or more names to the Attorney General and the President.

  • Federal judicial nominations are not confirmed when opposed by a senator of the President’s party from the state in which the nominee is to serve.

  • Presidents usually check carefully with the relevant senator ahead of time so that they will avoid making a nomination that will fail to be confirmed.


  • Judicial the selection in the lower courts:

  • The President usually has more influence in the selection of judges to the federal courts of appeal than to federal district courts.

  • The department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation conduct competency and background checks on prospective judicial nominees.

  • Sitting judges may be asked to evaluate prospective judicial nominees.

  • Nominations to lower federal courts are not confirmed when opposed by a senator from the state in which the nominee is to serve.


Selection of supreme court justices
Selection the of Supreme Court Justices

  • The President usually operates under fewer constraints in nominating members to the Supreme Court than to the lower courts.

  • Candidates for nomination to the Supreme Court usually keep a low profile.

  • The President usually relies on the Attorney General and the Department of Justice to identify and screen candidates for the Court.

  • Opposition to the nominee’s ideology is generally not considered a valid reason to vote against confirmation.




  • writ selection of judges and of certiorari: a formal document that calls up a case which deals with a Constitutional question or in which state laws are claimed to violate federal law.

  • In order for the Supreme Court to hear oral arguments or decide a case on the written record, four justices must agree to take the case.


  • Functions selection of judges and of the U.S. Solicitor General’s office:

  • review and modify the briefs presented in government appeals

  • represent the government before the Supreme Court

  • decide whether or not to appeal cases the government has lost in the lower courts

  • submitting briefs on behalf of a litigant in a case in which the governments not directly involved.


  • per selection of judges and curiamdecision: is a supreme Court ruling without explanation which resolves an immediate case but has no value as precedent because the Court does not offer reasoning that would guide lower courts in future decisions.

  • Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review.



  • Principal reasons for the Court’s choosing to hear a case would include each of the following:

  • conflict between different lower courts on the interpretation of federal law.

  • cases that involve major issues, like civil liberties.

  • disagreement between a majority of the Supreme Court and lower court Decisions.

  • cases submitted for review by the Solicitor General’s Office.


  • Concurring would include each of opinions are those offered by one or more Supreme Court justices not only to support a majority decision, but also to stress a different Constitutional or legal basis for the judgment.

  • A written opinion in a Supreme Court case is a statement of the legal reasoning behind a decision.


  • stare would include each of decisis: meaning that an earlier ruling should hold for the case being considered.

  • Judicial implementation: refers to how and whether court decisions are translated into real policy, affecting the behavior of others.


  • Statements would include each of about the Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison:

  • The Court ruled that it had no power to require that Marbury’s commission be delivered.

  • The Court ruled part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional.

  • The Court established its power to hold acts of Congress in violation of the Constitution.

  • The Court ruled that it did not have original jurisdiction over cases involving a write of mandamus.


  • statements about the courts and would include each of pluralism:

  • When groups go to court, they use litigation to achieve their policy objectives.

  • Almost every major policy decision these days ends up in court.

  • The habit of always turning to the courts as a last resort can add to policy delay, deadlock, and inconsistency.

  • Agencies and businesses commonly find themselves ordered by different courts to do opposite things.


  • Advocates would include each of of judicial activism emphasize that the courts may alleviate pressing needs, especially of those who are weak politically or economically, left unmet by the majoritarian political process.

  • The view that judges should play a minimal role in policy making is called judicial restraint.



  • Know what civil cases are. notify him when a

  • Define plaintiff.

  • The Supreme Court’s acceptance of in forma pauperis petitions reflects the principle of equal protection under the law.





  • President Carter appointed get admitted to the more women, African Americans, and Hispanics to the federal district and circuit courts than all previous presidents combined.

  • In Federalist #78, Alexander Hamilton argued that the federal courts’ ability to implement its decisions in the form of policy would be limited, because of its inability to enforce its decisions.


  • The fact that Miranda v. Arizona required law enforcement officials to Mirandize suspects prior to any questioning, even though it does not say so in the Constitution is a good example of judicial activism.

  • The most effective way a private citizen can implement Supreme Court decisions is through filing a lawsuit.





ad