Keeping The Republic - Chapter 10

Front 1

courts

Back 1

institutions that sit as neutral third parties to resolve conflicts according to the law

Front 2

civil-law tradition

Back 2

a legal system based on a detailed comprehensive legal code, usually created by the legislature

Front 3

common-law tradition

Back 3

a legal based on the accumulated rulings of judges over time, applied uniformly-judge-made law

Front 4

precedent

Back 4

a previous decision or ruling that, in common-law tradition, is binding on subsequent decisions

Front 5

adversarial system

Back 5

trial procedures designed to resolve conflict through the clash of opposing sides, moderated by a neutral, passive judge who applies the law

Front 6

inquisitorial system

Back 6

trial procedures designed to determine the truth through the intervention of an active judge who seeks evidence and questions witnesses

Front 7

substantive laws

Back 7

laws whose content or substance defines what we can or cannot do

Front 8

procedural laws

Back 8

laws that establish how laws are applied and enforced- how legal proceedings take place

Front 9

procedural due process

Back 9

procedural laws that protect the rights of individuals who must deal with the legal system

Front 10

criminal laws

Back 10

laws prohibiting behavior the government has determined to be harmful to society; violation of a criminal law is called a crime

Front 11

civil laws

Back 11

laws regulating interactions between individuals; violation of a civil law is call a tort

Front 12

constitutional law

Back 12

law stated in the Constitution or in the body of judicial decisions about the meaning of the Constitution handed down in the courts

Front 13

statutory laws

Back 13

laws passed by a state or the federal legislature

Front 14

administrative law

Back 14

law established by the bureaucracy, on behalf of Congress

Front 15

executive orders

Back 15

clarifications of congressional policy issued by the president and having the full force of the law

Front 16

judicial review

Back 16

the power of the courts to determine the constitutionality of laws

Front 17

Maybury v Madison

Back 17

the landmark case that established the U.S. Supreme Court's power of judicial review

Front 18

jurisdiction

Back 18

a court's authority to hear certain cases

Front 19

original jurisdiction

Back 19

the authority of a court to hear a case first

Front 20

appellate jurisdiction

Back 20

the authority of a court to review decisions made by lower courts

Front 21

appeal

Back 21

a rehearing of a case because the losing party in the original trial argues that a point of law was not applied properly

Front 22

senatorial courtesy

Back 22

tradition of granting senior senators of the president's party considerable power over federal judicial appointments in their home state

Front 23

strict constructionism

Back 23

a judicial approach holding that the Constitution should be read literally, with the framers' intentions uppermost in mind

Front 24

judicial interpretivism

Back 24

a judicial approach holding that the Constitution is a living document and that judges should interpret it according to changing times and values

Front 25

writs of certiorari

Back 25

formal requests by the U.S. Supreme Court to call up the lower court case it decides to hear on appeal

Front 26

Rule of Four

Back 26

the unwritten requirement that four Supreme Court justices must agree to grant a case certiorari in order for the case to be heard

Front 27

Solicitor general

Back 27

Justice Department officer who argues the government's cases before the Supreme Court

Front 28

amicus curiae briefs

Back 28

"friend of the court" documents filed by interested parties to encourage the Court to grant or deny certiorari or to urge it to decide a case in a particular way

Front 29

judicial activism

Back 29

view the courts should be lawmaking, policy making bodies

Front 30

judicial restraint

Back 30

view that the courts should reject any active lawmaking functions and stick to judicial interpretations of the past

Front 31

opinion

Back 31

the written decision of the Court that states the judgement of the majority

Front 32

concurring opinions

Back 32

documents written by justices expressing agreement with the majority ruling but describing different or additional reasons for the ruling

Front 33

dessenting opinions

Back 33

documents written by justices expressing disagreement with the majority ruling