The document discusses several key aspects of the US judiciary system:
1) It describes the concept of judicial review and how the federal courts have the power to rule on the constitutionality of laws and executive actions.
2) It outlines the development of the federal court system from the Founding Era to present day and how the role of the courts has expanded over time.
3) It discusses important Supreme Court cases that established principles like national supremacy of federal law and the Court's changing approach to economic and civil rights issues over different time periods.
Presentation about a few of the things established by the first President of the United States, including a little bit about Alexander Hamilton's economic plans
Presentation about a few of the things established by the first President of the United States, including a little bit about Alexander Hamilton's economic plans
Lecture Chapter 15 The Origins and Development of Judicial Power.docxBetseyCalderon89
Lecture: Chapter 15 The Origins and Development of Judicial Power
The framers of the United States Constitution made the judiciary the least defined of the three branches of government. The Constitution left open the actual structure of the court system for Congress to define it. Article III merely vests judicial power in one Supreme Court.
Therefore, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789. This legislation defined federal court jurisdiction and created the structure of the federal court system. Congress decreed that the judicial branch would have three tiers. The system would include district or trial courts at the first level, appellate courts at the second level, and the Supreme Court at the highest level.
Furthermore, Congress created the following jurisdictions: The Supreme Court would have original jurisdiction in cases involving states or ambassadors. This means all such cases immediately go to the Supreme Court. Additionally, the Supreme Court would have appellate jurisdiction in all cases decided by the lower federal or state courts. This means the Supreme Court has the right to review any legal decision on appeal.
Still, the judicial branch and the Supreme Court wielded little power at this point. The court system simply had no cases to decide. Of course, this is not too far off from what the framers had in mind. However, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall changed all of that with his decision in Marbury v. Madison.
Marshall's decision gave the Supreme Court the two immediate powers of judicial review and legal interpretation. Judicial review is the court's ultimate power. It has allowed the courts to update the Constitution through reinterpretation and to protect minorities against oppressive majorities. Also, the courts enjoy the power of legal interpretation. This is the power to interpret and reinterpret law.
However, case selection is the most often utilized Supreme Court power. The court wields vast power through its ability to hear or refuse to hear cases. The court has unfettered authority to choose which cases end up on its docket. In fact, the court accepts fewer than 1% of all cases presented for appeal.
Why does the Supreme Court refuse to hear certain cases? Legal scholars cite three basic reasons:
1
. Agreement with the lower court decision
The court could easily find nothing wrong with the lower court's decision. Also, the lower court may be in agreement with the Supreme Court's legal and political beliefs or philosophy.
2
. Issue not significant enough to warrant Supreme Court intervention
Every year, litigants appeal or file over 7,000 cases with the Supreme Court. The court eventually accepts approximately 100. Of course, the court will only accept those cases with significant legal, societal, or political consequences.
3
. Court not ready to hear issue
Some legal issues need time to season. For example, civil rights cases w.
3. U.S. District and Appellate Courts Administrative Office of the United States Courts (January 1983).
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11. Figure 16.1: Female and Minority Judicial Appointments, 1963-2003 Updated from Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2003-2004 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 2003), table 7.5.
12. Figure 16.1: Female and Minority Judicial Appointments, 1963-2003 Updated from Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2003-2004 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 2003), table 7.5.
13. Figure 16.1: Female and Minority Judicial Appointments, 1963-2003 Updated from Harold W. Stanley and Richard G. Niemi, Vital Statistics on American Politics, 2003-2004 (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Quarterly, 2003), table 7.5.
![Judicial Review ,[object Object],[object Object]]()