Send a link to your students to track their progress
25 Terms
1
New cards
amicus curiae
“Friend of the court”; amici may file briefs or even appear to argue their interests orally before the court.
2
New cards
appellate jurisdiction
The power vested in particular courts to review and/or revise the decision of a lower court
3
New cards
brief
A document containing the legal written arguments in a case fled with a court by a party prior to a hearing or trial.
4
New cards
dissenting opinions
A type of judicial opinion issued by a minority of judges on a court who disagree with the outcome of a case and wish to explain their legal reasoning
5
New cards
concurring opinions
A type of judicial opinion issued by a minority of judges on a court who agree with the outcome of a case, but wishes to express different legal reasoning.
6
New cards
Federalist No. 78
A Federalist Papers essay authored by Alexander Hamilton that covers the role of the federal judiciary, including the power of judicial review.
7
New cards
judicial activism
A philosophy of judicial decision making that posits judges should use their power broadly to further justice.
8
New cards
judicial implementation
How and whether judicial decisions are translated into actual public policies affecting more than the immediate parties to a lawsuit.
9
New cards
judicial restraint
A philosophy of judicial decision making that posits courts should allow the decisions of other branches of government to stand, even when they offend a judge’s own principles.
10
New cards
judicial review
Power of the courts to review acts of other branches of government and the states.
11
New cards
Marbury v. Madison
Case in which the Supreme Court first asserted the power of judicial review by fnd-ing that part of the congressional statute extending the Court’s original jurisdiction was unconstitutional.
12
New cards
original jurisdiction
The jurisdiction of courts that hear a case first, usually in a trial. These courts determine the facts of a case.
13
New cards
precedents
A prior judicial decision that serves as a rule for settling subsequent cases of a similar nature.
14
New cards
Rule of Four
At least four justices of the Supreme Court must vote to consider a case before it can be heard.
15
New cards
senatorial courtesy
A process by which presidents generally allow senators from the state in which a judicial vacancy occurs to block a nomination by simply register-ing their objection.
16
New cards
solicitor general
The fourth-ranking member of the Department of Justice; responsible for handling nearly all appeals on behalf of the U.S. government to the Supreme Court.
17
New cards
stare decisis
In court rulings, a reliance on past decisions or precedents to formulate decisions in new cases.
18
New cards
strict constructionist
An approach to constitutional interpretation that emphasizes interpreting the Constitution as it was originally written and intended by the Framers.
19
New cards
writ of certiorari
A request for the Supreme Court to order up the records from a lower court to review the case.
20
New cards
concurrent jurisdiction
allows the federal and state government to share jurisdiction and enforce both federal and state laws, as well as provide both federal and state services.
21
New cards
litigation
the process of resolving disputes by filing or answering a complaint through the public court system.
22
New cards
loose constructionist
the belief that the Constitution is a dynamic, living document that must change as the nation develops
23
New cards
majority opinion
an appellate opinion supporting the court's judgment (the result reached in the case) which receives a majority vote of the justices or judges hearing the case.
24
New cards
oral arguments
a presentation of a case before a court by spoken word. Lawyers or parties representing each side in a dispute have 30 minutes to make their case and answer questions from Supreme Court justices or Intermediate Appellate Court judges.
25
New cards
standing to sue
The requirement that plaintiffs have a serious interest in a case, which depends on whether they have sustained or are likely to sustain a direct and substantial injury from another party or from an action of government.