a state and federal court system exist and operate at the same time
civil lawsuit
people seek compensation from those whom they accuse of violating contracts or causing personal injuries or property damage
US distric courts
94
job is to handle cases concerning federal law and laws enacted by congress
appellate jurisdiction
review errors that occur in trial court
majority opinion
represents the view of majority of the judges who heard the case
concurring opinions
judges who agree with the outcome favored by the majority but wish to present their own reasons for agreeing
dissenting opinion
express their points of disagreement with the views expressed by the majority opinion
how a case moves through the US supreme court
US supreme court shapes law for entire country
choose on 70 to 80 cases/7000 cases
writ of certioari
rule of four
attorney speak
justices meet privately
gains 5 or more justices win
writ of certiorari
how cases are presented to the court commands lower court to send a case forward
rule of four
four justices must vote to hear a specific case
each sides attorney
speaks for 30 minutes while justices ask questions
justices meet
(9) meet privatly in their weekly conference to present their views to each other
describe characteristics of supreme cour justices
9 total
3 women
6 men
1 aferican american
1 latino
scalia most conservative
kagen newest member
also only one who wasnt a federal judge
sotomayor most liberal
describe judicial review
aritcle 3
marbury v madison
adam atempt to pack the court with federalists
james madison refused
judiciary act of 1789
writ of mandamus
unconstituional
article three
defines the authority of the judiciary
marbury v madison
marbry was a last minute appointment by adams
james madison
rufused to deliver the commisions to marbury and several other judicial appointees
judiciary act of 1789
seeking a writ of mandamus
writ of mandamus
traditional leagal order through which a court directs a gov official to take a specific action required by law
marbury v madison decision
marbury was entitled to commision but declined the issue becuase it was unconstitutional.
describe judicial decision making
battles in federal courts
original intent approach
avoid judicial activism
flexible interpretation
judicial selection battles
in federal courts, especially those related to nomination of supreme court justices, often focus on the nominees approach to constitutional interpretation
original intent argure
the constitution must be interpretated in strict accordance with the original meanings intended by the people who wrote and ratified the document
judicial activism
judges inject their own viewpoints into constitutional interpretation
followers of original intent call themselves
advocates of judical restraint
critics of original intent
argue there is no way to know exactly what the constitutions authors intended
flexible interpretation
contemporary judges give meaning to those words in the light of current values and policy problems