Ap Us Go Po: Ch 16 The Judiciary

Front 1

amicus curiae

Back 1

"Friend of the court"; a third party to a lawsuit who files a legal brief for the purpose of raising additional points of view (legal, economic, historical) in an attempt to influence a court's decision.

Front 2

brief

Back 2

a written statement by an attorney that summarizes a case and the laws an rulings that support it

Front 3

class action suit

Back 3

Lawsuits in which a small number of people sue on behalf of all people in similar circumstances.

Front 4

sovereign immunity

Back 4

the rule that a citizen cannot sue the government without the government's consent

Front 5

concurring opinion

Back 5

a signed opinion in which one or more members agree with the majority view but for different reasons

Front 6

constitutional courts

Back 6

a federal court authorized by Article III of the constitution that keeps judges in office during good behavior and prevents their salaries from being reduced

Front 7

district courts

Back 7

the lowest federal courts; federal trials can be held here only; 94 U.S. district courts

Front 8

judicial review

Back 8

The power of the courts to determine whether acts of Congress and, by implication, the executive or executive agencies and by the States are in accord with the U.S. Constitution.

Front 9

litmus test

Back 9

an examination of the political ideology of a nominated judge

Front 10

writ of certiorari

Back 10

an order by a higher court directing a lower court to send up a case for review

Front 11

Marbury v. Madison

Back 11

case that established judicial review

Front 12

writ of mandamus

Back 12

issued by a superior court to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly

Front 13

Rule of Four

Back 13

four Supreme Court Justices must approve of a lower court trial in order for the trial to be heard

Front 14

senatorial courtesy

Back 14

the customary manner in which the Senate disposes of federal judicial nominations in one state

Front 15

adversarial system

Back 15

In this system, the parties to a controversy develop and present their arguments, gather and submit evidence, call and question witnesses, and, within the confines of certain rules, control the process.

Front 16

justiciable dispute

Back 16

A requirement that to be heard in a case must be capable of being settled as a matter of law rather than on other grounds as is commonly the case in legislative.

Front 17

political question

Back 17

an issue the supreme court will allow the executive and legislative branches decide

Front 18

judicial activism

Back 18

A judicial philosophy in which judges make bold policy decisions, even charting new constitutional ground. Advocates of this approach emphasize that the courts can correct pressing needs. NOT the same thing as political liberalism.

Front 19

judicial restraint

Back 19

A judicial philosophy in which judges play minimal policymaking roles, leaving that duty strictly to the legislatures. NOT the same thing as political conservatism.

Front 20

stare decisis

Back 20

"Let the decision stand" or allowing prior rulings to control the current case

Front 21

remedy

Back 21

a judicial order enforcing a right or redressing a wrong

Front 22

U.S. Courts of Appeals

Back 22

Appellate courts empowered to review all final decisions of district courts, except in rare cases. In addition, they also hear appeals to orders of many federal regulatory agencies; 12 federal circuits.

Front 23

dissenting opinion

Back 23

a signed opinion in which one or more justices disagree with the majority view; sometimes the arguments in one of these forms the basis for a later reversal of precedent

Front 24

Panel of Three

Back 24

federal appellate court judges hear cases by sitting on one of these

Front 25

concurring opinion

Back 25

written by a justice who agrees with the majority holding or decision, but not with the legal reasoning in the majority opinion; appellate court judges hate it because it "muddies" precedent

Front 26

holding

Back 26

the majority decision of the court

Front 27

legal reasoning

Back 27

the explanation of how and why the decision (holding) was reached

Front 28

statutory or code law

Back 28

laws passed by actual legislatures (national or state)

Front 29

common law

Back 29

law established through custom and usage, based on previous court decisions; legal precedent = key!

Front 30

three basic functions of courts

Back 30

1.) settle disputes 2.) interpret laws 3.) create expectations for future actions

Front 31

dual court system

Back 31

feature of federalism; we live under both state and federal court systems

Front 32

4 main characteristics of the federal court system

Back 32

1) separation of powers 2) hierarchical 3) perform judicial review 4) independence

Front 33

life or good behavior

Back 33

term of most federal judges

Front 34

judicial independence

Back 34

why federal judges are appointed for life/good behavior and their salaries cannot be reduced

Front 35

questions of fact

Back 35

trial courts are interested in these

Front 36

questions of law

Back 36

appellate courts are interested in these

Front 37

jurisdiction

Back 37

the set of cases a court is authorized to hear; 2 kinds - original and appellate

Front 38

original jurisdiction

Back 38

the power to hear a case for the first time in order to determine the facts according to the rules of evidence (done by jury or judge); held by trial courts - federal district courts;

Front 39

appellate jurisdiction

Back 39

the power to decide questions of law; done by judges who hear appeals filed by defendants who argue that something was wrong with the PROCEDURE or the LAW applied in the original case

Front 40

plea bargain

Back 40

90% of cases never go to court because they are settled out of court this way

Front 41

criminal and civil law

Back 41

two main types of law

Front 42

criminal law

Back 42

generally statutes whose violation can result in jail time or fine; the state PROSECUTES the DEFENDANT in these cases

Front 43

civil law

Back 43

law governing disputes between individuals over damages; PLAINTIFF claims that DEFENDANT caused injury and seeks DAMAGES in court

Front 44

trial courts

Back 44

courts of original jurisdiction; lowest level in both state and federal system (federal district courts)

Front 45

penal code

Back 45

set of criminal laws (state or federal) passed by state legislature or congress

Front 46

plaintiff

Back 46

the person with a complaint who initiates a lawsuit; in a criminal case, the state

Front 47

defendant

Back 47

the accused

Front 48

state level

Back 48

system in which most cases occur

Front 49

ex. of federal crimes

Back 49

federal income tax evasion, mail fraud, and racketeering

Front 50

civil cases

Back 50

cases which arise from disputes between individuals or an individual and the government; the PLAINTIFF seeks DAMAGES for injury

Front 51

damages

Back 51

money the court orders the defendant to pay the plaintiff to compensate for injury and/or to punish for reckless behavior; compensatory and punitive

Front 52

torts

Back 52

cases about contracts, property, or personal injury

Front 53

cases under jurisdiction of federal district court

Back 53

1) federal law at issue 2) involving treaties 3) involving the Constitution 4) U.S. government is party to suit

Front 54

1st Monday in October

Back 54

annual term of SCOTUS begins

Front 55

nine

Back 55

# of Supreme Court justices; 8 associate justices and 1 chief justice

Front 56

8,000 / 80

Back 56

SCOTUS gets about _____ requests to hear cases per year, but it hears only about ____ cases.

Front 57

case or controversy

Back 57

SCOTUS does not answer hypothetical questions. It only hears a real ones where there is actual injury

Front 58

advisory opinion

Back 58

SCOTUS doesn't issue this kind of opinion

Front 59

standing to sue

Back 59

To have this, parties must have a substantial stake in the outcome of a case; they must show that they suffer actual injury.

Front 60

mootness

Back 60

SCOTUS will not hear a case no longer in need of resolution (e.g., when a party dies).

Front 61

ripeness

Back 61

If a case lacks this, SCOTUS thinks it's not yet ready to be heard.

Front 62

political question doctrine

Back 62

The idea that questions like these are better (who should be president) answered in arenas other than judicial ones.

Front 63

circuit splits

Back 63

when different circuit courts render contradictory opinions

Front 64

federal government

Back 64

SCOTUS almost always hears cases initiated by the ______.

Front 65

clear constitutional questions

Back 65

The Supreme Court almost alway s hears cases involving a _____ like about freedom or speech or religion.

Front 66

Solicitor General

Back 66

official who argues cases for the government before SCOTUS; also screens cert petitions; #3 in the Justice Department

Front 67

petitioner

Back 67

the party bringing the case to the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the lower court's decision

Front 68

respondent

Back 68

the party that wants SCOTUS to uphold the lower court's decision

Front 69

interest groups

Back 69

can influence the Supreme Court by filing AMICUS briefs

Front 70

oral argument

Back 70

Each side gets a half an hour to present these before the Supreme Court.

Front 71

questions

Back 71

Justices can interrupt oral argument with these.

Front 72

five

Back 72

# of votes required for a Supreme Court decision

Front 73

majority opinion

Back 73

delivers the holding and reasoning of the Supreme Court in a case

Front 74

create expectations and predictability

Back 74

One of the main things courts as part of the legal infrastructure necessary for businesses to operate

Front 75

bureaucratic expertise

Back 75

SCOTUS will generally defer to the ____ of a federal agency if the agency's action is consisted with the intent of the legislation. The Court almost need strikes down congressional delegation of power to the executive.

Front 76

national security

Back 76

The Supreme Court tends to defer to the executive on questions of _______.

Front 77

executive privilege

Back 77

Although SCOTUS did not strike it down, they denied Nixon's claim of it and forced him to turn over the Watergate tapes.

Front 78

habeas corpus

Back 78

SCOTUS places limits on the President's ability to deny this to suspected terrorists in RASUL V. BUSH.

Front 79

separation of powers

Back 79

Critics ask if JUDICIAL REVIEW violates this important principle.

Front 80

interpretation

Back 80

When the courts to this to laws, it has the effect of redefining a law without rewriting the statute. (e.g., MIRANDA V. ARIZONA didn't rewrite the AZ statute, but it changed police procedures in every state.)

Front 81

factors that influence SCOTUS

Back 81

congress, history, the president (but not much once justices are nominated), strategy, and political ideology

Front 82

implementation

Back 82

how the executive puts a courts decision into action

Front 83

reversal of precedent

Back 83

A dissenting opinion can lay the foundation for this to occur later.

Front 84

political ideology

Back 84

liberal or conservative

Front 85

judicial philosophy

Back 85

activism or self-restraint

Front 86

the Warren Court and the Burger Court

Back 86

Historically, these courts are viewed as activist courts.

Front 87

the Rehnquist Court

Back 87

Historically, this court is noted for judicial restraint.

Front 88

example of judicial activism by a conservative court

Back 88

The CITIZENS UNITED case broke with precedent and allowed much more campaign fundraising.

Front 89

example of judicial restraint by a liberal justice

Back 89

Current Justice Stephen Breyer advocates rendering decisions on a narrow basis so that change is incremental rather than sweeping.

Front 90

Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Sonya Sotomeyer, and Elena Kagan

Back 90

three current female Supreme Court justices

Front 91

Sandra Day O'Connor

Back 91

first female Supreme Court justice

Front 92

John Roberts

Back 92

current Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

Front 93

Antonin Scalia

Back 93

recently deceased and replaced by Trump nominee Neal Gorsuch; conservative justice noted for academic brilliance and "biting" pen

Front 94

Anthony Kennedy

Back 94

justice who often casts the "swing vote" on the current Supreme Court

Front 95

Thurgood Marshall

Back 95

first African American Supreme Court justice

Front 96

Clarence Thomas

Back 96

current African American Supreme Court justice

Front 97

Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Gorsuch (and sometimes Kennedy)

Back 97

the conservative wing of the current Supreme Court

Front 98

Ginsburg, Bryer, Sotomeyer, Kagan (and sometimes Kennedy)

Back 98

the liberal wing of the current Supreme Court

Front 99

Sonya Sotomeyer

Back 99

first Hispanic justice on the Supreme Court

Front 100

diversity

Back 100

cases involving citizens of different states are called cases in this

Front 101

Neal Gorsuch

Back 101

most recently appointed justice; Trump nominee;conservative judge who made lower-level ruling in Hobby Lobby case