Ap gov review ppt

3,478 views

Published on

0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
3,478
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
31
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ap gov review ppt

  1. 1. AP ReviewThe Judiciary
  2. 2. 1) Judicial authority extends to issues dealing with all the following areas EXCEPTa. Common Lawb. equityc. Civil lawd. Criminal lawe. Pending legislation
  3. 3. 1) Judicial authority extends to issues dealing with all the following areas EXCEPTa. Common Lawb. equityc. Civil lawd. Criminal lawe. Pending legislation
  4. 4. 2) Which of the following represents the best example of a case dealing with original jurisdiction?a. A review of New York and New Jersey arguing over property rights related to Ellis Islandb. An appeal by a convict on death rowc. A review of the constitutionality of a school district allowing prayer at a graduation ceremonyd. A review of President Nixon’s decision not to turn over the Watergate tapes to Congresse. A review of a federal law mandating affirmative action in industries that have contracts with the government
  5. 5. 2) Which of the following represents the best example of a case dealing with original jurisdiction?a. A review of New York and New Jersey arguing over property rights related to Ellis Islandb. An appeal by a convict on death rowc. A review of the constitutionality of a school district allowing prayer at a graduation ceremonyd. A review of President Nixon’s decision not to turn over the Watergate tapes to Congresse. A review of a federal law mandating affirmative action in industries that have contracts with the government
  6. 6. ExplanationThe constitution defines original jurisdiction as those cases that involve disputes between or among the states. In such instances the case must go directly to the Supreme Court. Most cases get to the Supreme Court on appeal. Thus, the only situation that applies to the definition is choice A.
  7. 7. 3) Which of the following principles does common law rely on?a. Judicial precedentb. Contract issuesc. Judicial restraintd. Habeas corpuse. Judicial activism
  8. 8. 3) Which of the following principles does common law rely on?a. Judicial precedentb. Contract issuesc. Judicial restraintd. Habeas corpuse. Judicial activism
  9. 9. ExplanationThe basis of common law is judicial precedent or its Latin equivalent stare decis. Contract law certainly relies on precedent, and advocates of judicial restraint and judicial activism also have specific viewpoints regarding overturning or upholding precedent. Habeas corpus appeals can also call upon precedent. The point is that the principle of precedent is extremely important.
  10. 10. 4) Which of the following actions requires senatorial courtesy?a. A bill introduced by a senator from one state must get agreement from the other senator in that stateb. Members of the same party agree on the order of legislationc. Senators from the state in which a judicial appointment is being made by the president are informed of who the candidate is prior to the actual appointmentd. The majority leader of the Senate informs the minority leader who he is appointing as committee chairmane. The president informs the chairman of the Judiciary Committee of a Supreme Court nominee prior to the announcement
  11. 11. 4) Which of the following actions requires senatorial courtesy?a. A bill introduced by a senator from one state must get agreement from the other senator in that stateb. Members of the same party agree on the order of legislationc. Senators from the state in which a judicial appointment is being made by the president are informed of who the candidate is prior to the actual appointmentd. The majority leader of the Senate informs the minority leader who he is appointing as committee chairmane. The president informs the chairman of the Judiciary Committee of a Supreme Court nominee prior to the announcement
  12. 12. 5) Which of the following committees is responsible for reviewing Supreme Court nominees?a. House Judiciaryb. Senate Judiciaryc. House Rulesd. Senate Appropriationse. House Ways and Means
  13. 13. 5) Which of the following committees is responsible for reviewing Supreme Court nominees?a. House Judiciaryb. Senate Judiciaryc. House Rulesd. Senate Appropriationse. House Ways and Means
  14. 14. 6) Acceptance of a writ of certiorari is based on all the following criteria EXCEPTa. A vote by three Supreme Court justicesb. A court decision that conflicts with precedentc. A court of appeals decision that conflicts with another court of appeals decisiond. Inconsistencies between courts of different statese. A split decision in the court of appeals
  15. 15. 6) Acceptance of a writ of certiorari is based on all the following criteria EXCEPTa. A vote by three Supreme Court justicesb. A court decision that conflicts with precedentc. A court of appeals decision that conflicts with another court of appeals decisiond. Inconsistencies between courts of different statese. A split decision in the court of appeals
  16. 16. ExplanationChoices B, C, D, and E are situations that over the years have become criteria for accepting appeals cases. There is no absolute requirement that states that, if the condition met in those examples exist, the Court must review the case. However, these examples have become the guiding principles of accepting cases for review. Choice A is incorrect because it is required that four justices agree to hear a case.
  17. 17. 7) Which represents a major reason for the submission of an amicus curiae brief?a. The Court must rely on precedent casesb. A friend of the court wishes to provide additional information to the Courtc. Lower courts must provide transcripts of its decisions.d. The Supreme Court requires related interest in the case to submit briefse. The brief from the petitioner provides amended information about the case
  18. 18. 7) Which represents a major reason for the submission of an amicus curiae brief?a. The Court must rely on precedent casesb. A friend of the court wishes to provide additional information to the Courtc. Lower courts must provide transcripts of its decisions.d. The Supreme Court requires related interest in the case to submit briefse. The brief from the petitioner provides amended information about the case
  19. 19. ExplanationIf you knew that the definition of amicus curiae is friend of the court, you certainly could pick out the right answer immediately. If you didn’t , you could probably proceed to eliminate choice A because even though it is a truthful statement, it has no relation to the submission of additional briefs. Choice C is also accurate but again does not provide new information. Choice D is a false statement, and briefs do not change information about a case. They make constitutional arguments about a case.
  20. 20. 8) The Court of which of the following Chief Justices handed down the most activist decisions?a. Salmon Chaseb. William Rehnquistc. Earl Warrend. Roger Taneye. Warren Berger
  21. 21. 8) The Court of which of the following Chief Justices handed down the most activist decisions?a. Salmon Chaseb. William Rehnquistc. Earl Warrend. Roger Taneye. Warren Berger
  22. 22. ExplanationEven though other justices throughout history may have been involved in decisions that have been considered activist, the Chief Justice best known as the leader of a activist court was Earl Warren. Berger’s Court comminuted some of Warren’s activism, but it was certainly the intent of Nixon in appointing him to modify the Court’s direction.
  23. 23. 9) An example of a decision that would be classified as activist isa. San Antonio v. Rodriguezb. Dred Scot v. Sanfordc. Plessy v. Fergusond. Brown v. Board of Educatione. New Jersey v. TLO
  24. 24. 9) An example of a decision that would be classified as activist isa. San Antonio v. Rodriguezb. Dred Scot v. Sanfordc. Plessy v. Fergusond. Brown v. Board of Educatione. New Jersey v. TLO
  25. 25. ExplanationThe classic example of an activist decision is the Brown base. The San Antonio case resulted in a decision that affirmed the state’s rights to fund schools even if it meant that poorer districts did not spend the same amount of money for its students. Dred Scott established that slaves were property. Plessy affirmed the states right o allow separate but equal. And New Jersey was able to search TLO without a warrant. These cases are all considered to uphold the principle of judicial restraint.
  26. 26. 10. The Court of which of the following Chief Justices is best known for exercising judicial restraint?a. John Marshallb. William Rehnquistc. Roger Taneyd. Earl Warrene. Warren Berger
  27. 27. 10. The Court of which of the following Chief Justices is best known for exercising judicial restraint?a. John Marshallb. William Rehnquistc. Roger Taneyd. Earl Warrene. Warren Berger
  28. 28. ExplanationThe justice best known for fostering an attitude that encouraged judicial restraint was Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Marshall’s decision in his time were precedent setting, and Warren personifies an activist justice. Taney and Burger, although making decisions that can be considered by those favoring judicial restraint as such, still did not have an overall record in the area as Rehnquist.
  29. 29. 11) Critics of judicial activism would favor a Supreme Court that woulda. Give greater protection to the accusedb. Expand civil rightsc. Acts as a watchdog over the other branches of governmentd. Increase the power of the federal governmente. Allow the president to influence the opinion of the Court
  30. 30. 11) Critics of judicial activism would favor a Supreme Court that woulda. Give greater protection to the accusedb. Expand civil rightsc. Acts as a watchdog over the other branches of governmentd. Increase the power of the federal governmente. Allow the president to influence the opinion of the Court
  31. 31. 12) Critics of judicial restraint would favor a Supreme Court that woulda. Create new precedentb. Decrease the power of the federal governmentc. Decrease the power of the state governmentsd. Only agree to hear a limited number of casese. Uphold precedent
  32. 32. 12) Critics of judicial restraint would favor a Supreme Court that woulda. Create new precedentb. Decrease the power of the federal governmentc. Decrease the power of the state governmentsd. Only agree to hear a limited number of casese. Uphold precedent
  33. 33. The End

×