Gov 141 Federal Courts

GOV 141: Federal Courts

Marbury v. Madison 





1801: President John Adams is set to leave office after losing to Thomas Jefferson. Appoints a number of Judges and Justice’s of the Peace in final days of office, including William Marbury. When Jefferson takes over he refuses to go through w/ appmt and orders James Madison to void it.

Marbury v. Madison 







William Marbury sues James Madison, Sec. of State, to enforce appmt. Enter new Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, John Marshall. Marshall feared Jefferson would not enforce a decision that ran against TJ. Marbury had asked the court to order TJ to seat Mabury. Said Congress gave them authority to do so.

Marbury v. Madison 

The crux of the case: 

Could Congress give the Supreme Court jurisdiction over cases beyond that given by the original constitution?

Marbury v. Madison 

Holding of the Case: 

Part of Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional to the extent it purports to enlarge the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond that permitted by the Constitution. Congress cannot pass laws that are contrary to the Constitution, and it is the role of the Federal courts to interpret what the Constitution permits

Marbury v. Madison 

Bottom Line: Established that the Court had Judicial Review over federal statutes and the final say so on what the constitution says/doesn’t say and allows/doesn’t allow.

Article III, Section 1 





The judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges… of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Article III, Section II 

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;-between a State and Citizens of another State;-between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Article III, Section II (continued) 



In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Article III, Section III 



Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Judicial Review 

The power of the Supreme Court to declare actions of other branches and levels of government unconstitutional… that is contrary to the U.S. constitution.

Original Jurisdiction 

Power of a court to take the first crack at a case… to be the first to hear a particular type of case.

Judicial Review and Democracy Who does it benefit?

Judicial Review  



Protects minorities Ensures powerful governments can’t roll over people. A very “republican” institution

Constitutional Courts 

Article III Courts

Legislative Courts 

Highly specialized courts created pursuant to Article I of the Constitution.

Article I tribunals                  

Administrative law courts Boards of Contract Appeals Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences Courts-martial in the U.S. armed forces Trademark Trial and Appeal Board United States bankruptcy courts United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims United States Court of Federal Claims United States Merit Systems Protection Board United States Tax Court United States territorial courts Supreme Court of the United States United States Court of International Trade United States courts of appeals United States district courts United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (“FISA” court) United States Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review

U.S. District Courts  

  



94 in America Court of original jurisdiction for most federal controversies Grand Juries: Indict Petit or trial juries: hear the cases Can only hear cases where party has standing and there must be actual controversy. Courts render verdicts

U.S. Courts of Appeal  







13 U.S. Circuits including D.C. For Kentucky, the 6th Circuit based in Cincinnati Court of Appeals courts are appellate courts, that is they hear cases that have been appealed from previous courts. Courts review, principally, for errors of law. Briefs are the crucial tool for lawyers to make their case followed by oral arguments. Courts render opinions based largely on precedents

Precedent 

A previous case whose legal issues were similar to the one/ones at hand. Such cases’ verdicts/opinions are intended to be instructive to the courts. While the Court doesn’t have to follow every precedent most are considered important.

Supreme Court 



Usually the appellate court of final jurisdiction. See graphic on page 427.

Stare Decisis  

Phonetically: stair-ee di-sahy-sis Legal doctrine that holds precedents should guide judicial decision making.

Why Stare Decisis 





Used in Common Law systems rather than Civil Law systems Decision made by a higher court is binding precedent (also known as mandatory authority) which a lower court cannot overturn Court should not overturn its own precedents unless there is a strong reason to do so and should be guided by principles from lateral and lower courts. This is an advisory principle which courts can and do occasionally ignore

Appointment to the Federal Bench 







District, Circuit, and Supreme Court appointments require confirmation by U.S. Senate. Lower courts are not AS political and are often subject to the wishes of more localized powers… such as a state’s highest ranking R or D, depending on who’s President. Senatorial Courtesy: Tradition where state’s Sr. Senator clears federal appointments within their state. In Appeals’ court judgeships tend to be partitioned out to various states.

Fillibustering Judicial Nominees  

Increasingly common. Reflects increased politicization of courts.

Supreme Court in Action   



Plaintiff or Defendant Appellant or Appellee/Respondent Writ of Cert: Announcement that the Supremes will hear lower court case… requires four of nine justices. Amicus Curiae: Friends of the court briefs… non-party’s file.

Supreme Court in Action 





Majority Opinions: State the opinion of the majority. Concurring Opinions: The opinion of one or more judges who agree but for a reason different than the majority. Dissenting Opinion: The opinion of the judge or judges who disagree with the outcome and the legal reasoning of the majority.

GOV 141: The Federal Judiciary

What Role Should Courts Serve? 



Activist Courts- Often derogatory term; used to describe courts that are more willing to find new “constitutional” rights than conservatives prefer. Courts that interpret the law, not make law- favorable distinction used by conservatives to describe courts they prefer to activist ones.

Judicial Philosophy 



Textualism: Interpretation of law based principally on text of laws. Originalists- Interpret constitution according to what the founding father’s intended.

Judiciary Politics     

Federalist Society American Bar Association (ABA) Pro-life groups Pro-choice groups ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union)

Eras in Supreme Court History 

National Power and Property Rights: The initial period the Supreme Court beginning with John Marshall. Marshall was a Federalist and a nationalist. Believed strongly in need for centralized government. Also believed in the (related) need for national commerce. Very protective of property rights.

Eras in Supreme Court History 

Government and the Economy: The U.S. Civil War and Industrial Revolution brought mass production corporate economy. Initially the court took the position that the corporation, which it determined was a person, was to be protected against regulation by governments. This lasted until FDR’s second term.

Individual Rights and Liberties Period where courts turned their focus to the relationships between individual people and governments. Court supported desegregation, created a new right for women to obtain an abortion, used the 14th amendment to apply rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights to the states.

Conservative, or Rehnquist, Era 

Began with the appointment of Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Courts began to reign in federal government and recognize states’ rights. Stricter interpretation of the commerce clause. Found increased use for sovereign immunity doctrines. Also the era of Sandra Day O’Connor, the courts continual swing voter.