AP Federal Courts

2. PURPOSE OF THE JUDICIARY
•COURTS SETTLE DISPUTES BETWEEN TWO SIDES
ACCORDING TO LAW (WITHOUT BIAS)
•INTERPRET WHAT THE LAW MEANS IN CONTEXT
OF THE CONSTITUTION AND APPLIES THE LAW
ACCORDINGLY TO VARIOUS SITUATIONS

3. TYPES OF CASES
•CRIMINAL CASE - GOV’T CHARGES AN INDIVIDUAL
WITH THE BREAKING OF A STATE OR FEDERAL
LAW
• PUNISHMENT: IMPRISONMENT, FINES
•CIVIL CASE - DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO
INDIVIDUALS OR AN INDIVIDUAL AND A COMPANY
OVER DAMAGES OR INJURIES RECEIVED
• PUNISHMENT: FINES/COMPENSATION FOR DAMAGES

4. MAIN PARTICIPANTS
1.) LITIGANTS
•A CASE MUST BE BROUGHT BEFORE COURT BY TWO
PARTIES:
• PLAINTIFF - PARTY THAT BRINGS THE CASE TO COURT
(ACCUSER)
• DEFENDANT - PARTY BEING BROUGHT TO COURT (ACCUSED)
•MUST HAVE STANDING TO SUE - HAVE SERIOUS STAKE IN
CASE AND PROVE THAT DANGER OR INJURY IS INVOLVED
•LITIGANTS CAN BE INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS (EX: CLASS
ACTION LAWSUITS  MULTIPLE PEOPLE SUING/GOING
TO COURT FOR THE SAME ISSUE/INJURY)

5. 2.) ATTORNEYS
•THE LAWYERS AND VARIOUS LEGAL COUNSEL FOR
BOTH SIDES OF A JUDICIAL DISPUTE
•GUARANTEED TO ALL INDIVIDUALS BY THE 6TH
AMENDMENT FOR THEIR DEFENSE

6. 3.) INTEREST GROUPS
•OFTEN TURN TO THE COURTS TO MAKE POLICY
WHEN UNSUCCESSFUL WITH OTHER GOV’T
INSTITUTIONS
•FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS - “FRIEND OF THE
COURT”; ARGUMENTS TO TRY TO INFLUENCE A
COURT TO RULE IN THE GROUP’S FAVOR

7. JURISDICTION
•JURISDICTION - THE AUTHORITY OF A COURT TO HEAR
A CASE
TWO TYPES:
•ORIGINAL JURISDICTION - AUTHORITY TO HEAR A
CASE FIRST (AND HEAR THE FACTS OF A CASE)
• EX: TRIAL COURTS (STATE LEVEL), DISTRICT COURTS (FED.
LEVEL)
•APPELLATE JURISDICTION - AUTHORITY TO HEAR A
CASE BROUGHT UP FROM A LOWER COURT ONLY
(DECIDES ON LEGAL ISSUES FROM LOWER COURT
DECISIONS)
• EX: COURTS OF APPEALS

8. STRUCTURE OF THE FEDERAL
COURT SYSTEM
LEVEL I: DISTRICT COURTS
•94 DISTRICT COURTS (AT LEAST 1 IN EACH STATE
+ D.C. AND TERRITORIES); 2-28 JUDGES PER
DISTRICT
•HAVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION ON FEDERAL
LEVEL AND HOLD TRIALS
•MOST FEDERAL CASES START AND END HERE

9. WHAT TYPES OF CASES GO TO FED.
DISTRICT COURTS?
• MOST CASES IN JUDICIAL SYSTEM ARE HEARD ON STATE
COURT LEVELS, NOT THE FED. LEVEL
FEDERAL CASES INVOLVE:
• FEDERAL CRIMES
• CIVIL SUITS INVOLVING FEDERAL LAW
• STATE VS. STATE, RESIDENT OF ONE STATE VS. ANOTHER,
AMBASSADORS VS. FOREIGN GOV’TS
• MARITIME LAW (LAWS AT SEA)
• NATURALIZATION
• BANKRUPTCY
• SOME EXECUTIVE AGENCY CASES

10. LEVEL II: COURTS OF APPEALS
•12 APPEALS COURTS + 1 U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT
•HAVE APPELLATE JURISDICTION ONLY (NO
TRIALS) --> DECIDE IF DISTRICT COURTS MADE A
JUDICIAL MISTAKE IN RULING
•HAS PANEL OF 3 JUDGES FOR A CASE

11. JUDICIAL CIRCUITS
•FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM IS DIVIDED ACROSS
COUNTRY INTO 12 JUDICIAL CIRCUITS
•EACH CIRCUIT CONTAINS SEVERAL DISTRICT
COURTS AND ONE COURT OF APPEALS

12. U.S. JUDICIAL CIRCUITS

13. LEVEL III: U.S. SUPREME COURT
•ONLY COURT CREATED SPECIFICALLY BY
CONSTITUTION
•HIGHEST COURT IN THE U.S.
•HAS BOTH ORIGINAL AND APPELLATE
JURISDICTION (MOST CASES APPEALED)
•MADE UP OF 9 JUSTICES (8 ASSOCIATE
JUSTICES + CHIEF JUSTICE)
•HEAR ONLY A SELECT FEW CASES A YEAR OUT
OF TOTAL APPEALED

14. JUDICIAL QUALIFICATIONS
•CONSTITUTION IS VAGUE ABOUT JUDICIAL
QUALIFICATIONS
•FEDERAL JUDGES AND JUSTICES SERVE FOR LIFE
“DURING GOOD BEHAVIOR”
•CAN BE IMPEACHED, CONVICTED, AND REMOVED
BY CONGRESS

16. JUDICIAL SELECTION
•THE PRESIDENT APPOINTS FEDERAL JUDGES AND
JUSTICES WITH ADVICE AND CONSENT OF SENATE
(APPOINTEES SCREENED BY FBI, DOJ, AND WHITE
HOUSE)
•SENATORIAL COURTESY - PRESIDENT CHECKS WITH
HIS PARTY’S SENATORS FROM THE STATE A JUDICIAL
NOMINEE IS FROM/WILL SERVE IN BEFORE
OFFICIALLY NOMINATING THEM

17. •SENATE HAS MORE INFLUENCE OVER DISTRICT
AND APPEALS COURT NOMINEES BECAUSE
THEY SERVE IN PARTICULAR STATES
•LESS INFLUENCE OVER SUPREME COURT
NOMINEES (WHO SERVE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE)
•SENATE CONFIRMATION DEBATES OFTEN
SUBJECT TO INTENSE ARGUMENTS OVER
NOMINEES’ POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES,
QUALIFICATIONS, ETC.

18. THE PRESIDENT AND THE SUPREME
COURT
•ABOVE ALL, NOMINATING SC JUSTICES IS A VERY
IMPORTANT LEGACY FOR A PRESIDENT TO LEAVE
•PRESIDENTS GENERALLY NOMINATE CANDIDATES
WHOSE POLITICAL IDEOLOGIES ARE SIMILAR TO
THEIR OWN (AND SO WILL UPHOLD THEIR
VIEWPOINTS/POLICIES)

19. BACKGROUNDS OF JUDGES AND
JUSTICES
•OFTEN HAVE HAD EXPERIENCE AS ATTORNEYS,
JUDGES, CLERKS, ETC. IN FEDERAL COURTS
•SOME HAVE HELD ELECTIVE OFFICE OR HAD
PRIOR POLITICAL EXPERIENCE
•HAVE DEMONSTRATED POLITICAL STANCES BY
THEIR DECISIONS/OPINIONS ON PRIOR CASES
•SC: TEND TO BE OLDER, UPPER-MIDDLE TO UPPER
CLASS, PROTESTANT, WHITE, MALE (ONLY 4
WOMEN HAVE EVER SERVED ON SC)

21. CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS
•EDUCATION:
HARVARD LAW
•APPOINTED BY:
GEORGE W. BUSH
•TIME ON COURT: 15
YEARS
•CONSERVATIVE

22. CLARENCE THOMAS
•EDUCATION: YALE
LAW
•APPOINTED BY:
GEORGE H.W. BUSH
•TIME ON COURT:
29 YEARS
•CONSERVATIVE

23. RUTH BADER GINSBURG
•EDUCATION:
CORNELL, HARVARD
LAW
•APPOINTED BY: BILL
CLINTON
•TIME ON COURT: 27
YEARS
•LIBERAL

24. STEPHEN BREYER
•EDUCATION:
STANFORD,
HARVARD LAW
•APPOINTED BY: BILL
CLINTON
•TIME ON COURT: 26
YEARS
•LIBERAL

25. SAMUEL ALITO
•EDUCATION:
PRINCETON, YALE
LAW
•APPOINTED BY:
GEORGE W. BUSH
•TIME ON COURT: 14
YEARS
•CONSERVATIVE

26. SONIA SOTOMAYOR
•EDUCATION:
PRINCETON, YALE
LAW
•APPOINTED BY:
BARACK OBAMA
•TIME ON COURT: 11
YEARS
•LIBERAL

27. ELENA KAGAN
•EDUCATION:
PRINCETON,
HARVARD LAW
•APPOINTED BY:
BARACK OBAMA
•TIME ON COURT: 10
YEARS
•LIBERAL

28. NEIL GORSUCH
oEDUCATION:
HARVARD LAW
oAPPOINTED BY:
DONALD TRUMP
oTIME ON COURT: 3
YEARS
oCONSERVATIVE

29. BRETT KAVANAUGH
EDUCATION: YALE
APPOINTED BY:
DONALD TRUMP
TIME ON COURT:
1.5 YEARS
CONSERVATIVE

30. HOW A CASE GOES THROUGH THE
SUPREME COURT
•OUT OF 8,000 POTENTIAL CASES A YEAR, THE SC
ONLY HEARS ABOUT 80
1.) JUSTICES LOOK OVER POSSIBLE CASES FILTERED
BY CLERKS
- RULE OF FOUR - IF FOUR JUSTICES AGREE TO
HEAR A CASE, IT IS PUT ON THE DOCKET (LIST OF
CASES THE COURT WILL HEAR)
-INFLUENCES: AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS,
SOLICITOR GENERAL

31. WHAT KINDS OF CASES?
•SC GENERALLY FAVORS CASES INVOLVING A QUESTION
ON INTERPRETING THE CONSTITUTION, CIVIL
LIBERTIES, OR DISPUTES IN FEDERAL COURTS
•GENERALLY AVOID OVERLY CONTROVERSIAL/ “HOT
BUTTON” ISSUES AND POLITICAL QUESTIONS
(CONFLICTS BETWEEN CONGRESS AND PRESIDENT)

32. 2.) ALL CHOSEN CASES ARE PUT ON THE DOCKET
3.) SC ISSUES WRIT OF CERTIORARI - ORDER FOR
A CASE TO BE BROUGHT UP FROM A LOWER
COURT (IF CASE HAS BEEN APPEALED)
4.) EACH LITIGANT SUBMITS A BRIEF (A
WRITTEN SUMMARY OF THEIR SIDE OF THE
CASE); AMICUS CURIAE BRIEFS ALSO FILED
5.) ORAL ARGUMENTS - EACH SIDE GETS 30
MINUTES TO ARGUE CASE BEFORE THE SC

33. 6.) JUSTICES CONFERENCE TO DISCUSS THE CASES
HEARD AND TO ASSIGN OPINIONS
7.) JUSTICES WRITE OPINIONS -STATEMENTS THAT
GIVE THE LEGAL REASONING BEHIND THE
COURT’S DECISION

34. THREE TYPES OF OPINIONS:
•MAJORITY OPINION - THE OFFICIAL RULING
OF THE SC CONTAINING A MAJORITY OF THE
JUSTICES
•DISSENTING OPINION - WRITTEN BY JUSTICES
WHO DISAGREE WITH THE MAJORITY OPINION
•CONCURRING OPINION - WRITTEN BY
JUSTICES WHO AGREE WITH THE MAJORITY
OPINION, BUT FOR DIFFERENT REASONS

35. •SC DECISIONS SET PRECEDENTS - GUIDELINES
FOR HOW ALL SIMILAR CASES WILL BE DECIDED
IN THE FUTURE
•LOWER COURTS ARE TO FOLLOW THE SC’S
EXAMPLE
•STARE DECISIS - “LET THE DECISION STAND”; THE
SC USES A PAST CASE DECISION TO DECIDE A
CURRENT CASE

36. THE SUPREME COURT AND THE
CONSTITUTION
•TWO THEORIES ON INTERPRETING THE
CONSTITUTION:
•ORIGINAL INTENT - JUSTICES INTERPRET THE
CONSTITUTION OR A LAW THE WAY THE
FRAMERS INTENDED IT TO BE INTERPRETED
•ORIGINAL MEANING - JUSTICES INTERPRET
THE CONSTITUTION OR A LAW THE WAY
PEOPLE AT THE TIME IT WAS CREATED WOULD
HAVE INTERPRETED IT

37. THE COURT AND POLICYMAKING
• THE SC HAS NO EXECUTIVE POWER TO ENFORCE ITS
DECISIONS
• MUST RELY ON OTHER PARTS OF GOV’T TO IMPLEMENT
THEM (LAW ENFORCEMENT, EXECUTIVE AGENCIES,
CONGRESS, ETC.)
• IT IS SEEN AS UNPOPULAR/UNWISE FOR GOV’T TO
IGNORE SC DECISIONS
• JUDICIAL IMPLEMENTATION - TRANSLATING A COURT
DECISION INTO A WORKING PUBLIC POLICY

38. THE SUPREME COURT AND THE
OTHER BRANCHES
•JUDICIAL REVIEW - THE POWER OF THE COURTS
TO DECLARE A CONGRESSIONAL LAW (STATUTE)
OR AN EXECUTIVE ACTION UNCONSTITUTIONAL
•(EST. MARBURY V. MADISON)
•CONGRESS CAN DRAFT LEGISLATION TO CLARIFY
EXISTING LAWS OR ESSENTIALLY OVERRIDE
COURT DECISIONS

39. INTERPRETING THE POWER OF THE
SUPREME COURT
•SC IS AWARE OF PUBLIC OPINION ON POLITICAL
ISSUES, BUT NOT BOUND BY THEM
TWO CONTRASTING PHILOSOPHIES OF SC POWER:
•JUDICIAL RESTRAINT - JUSTICES RULE ACCORDING TO
PRECEDENT (PREVIOUS COURT DECISIONS) AND
REFRAIN FROM BOLD POLICYMAKING DECISIONS
(DEFER TO ELECTED OFFICIALS TO DO THIS)

40. •JUDICIAL ACTIVISM - JUSTICES ACTIVELY
OVERTURN PRECEDENTS AND CREATE BOLD, NEW
PRECEDENTS AND POLICIES IN THE PROCESS (DO
NOT DEFER AS MUCH TO ELECTED OFFICIALS)