law 210 midterm sg #2 ch 9-16

Why is judicial review controversial?

Unelected judges have the power to undo decisions of elected branches 

What is counter majoritarian?

Making rulings against majority of the public 

Two types of statutory interpretation?

Purposivism: A legal theory that a court's statutory interpretation should reflect the statutes original purpose Textualism: Focuses on the words of a statute 

Two types of constitutional interpretation

Originalism and pragmatism 

Why did the Framers design the federal judiciary to operate independently from the political branches and public opinion?

To prevent political or public pressures from compromising the integrity and legitimacy of court decisions.

The good behavior clause

Ensures federal judges hold their seats for life, as long as they maintain “good behavior”

The compensation clause

Guarantees judges salaries cannot be reduced

What is the power of judicial review?

Allows the Court to review the constitutionality of federal and state governmental actions and strike them down if found unconstitutional; Aggressive use of judicial review can “seriously weaken the Democratic process”

Justiciability

Concerns whether the court is appropriately ready to hear a case

What must a standing have?

Actual injury, causation, redressability; Plaintiff must have a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or actions challenged

Ripeness

Courts must make decisions about actual controversies, not hypotheticals

Requirements for a ripe case

Fitness of the issues for judicial decision: based on future events; hardship to the parties of withholding Court consideration until a later time

Political question

Restricts courts from adjudicating disputes that are more appropriately addressed by other branches, involved policy determination, or lack judicially manageable standards for resolution

When can you consider a case moot?

If there is a resolution before making it to court, if there are changes in the circumstance, or if a court's decision would no longer have any effect

Jurisdiction

Whether a court has the ability to hear a case

Subject matter jurisdiction

whether a particular court has the power to hear a specific case based on the type of dispute. Each court system (state, federal, or specialized) has its own set of rules defining the scope of cases it can handle. Ex: State courts: can hear almost any type of case; federal courts: can only hear if the federal law is involved or the litigants are from different states and the lawsuit is worth more than $75,000

Personal jurisdiction

ensures that defendants are not unfairly dragged into distant or irrelevant courts, protecting the due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution; A court’s authority over the parties involved

What was a significant point of debate when the First Congress organized the national judicial branch in 1789?

Whether to establish lower federal courts or to utilize existing state courts for federal jurisdiction

How does the Supreme Court ensure a decision can be made during their conferences?

A quorum of six members is needed to make a decision on a case

How does the Supreme Court handle cases when there is a tie due to a justice's absence or recusal?

The decision from the lower court is upheld

the process and significance of opinion writing in the U.S. Supreme Court?

After a tentative decision is reached, the justice assigned to write the opinion drafts it and seeks to persuade other justices, potentially leading to changes in the opinion to gain majority support

What are the two purposes of the US Court of Appeals?

Error correction (They don't seek new factual evidence, but instead examine the record of the lower court for errors) and sorting out / developing those few cases worthy of Supreme Court review

What role do the U.S. District Courts primarily serve within the federal judicial system?

They function as the initial trial courts where most federal cases are first adjudicated and factual records are established

How did the role and perception of state courts evolve in the period following the American Revolution?

State legislatures initially exerted heavy control over the courts, reflecting a public distrust of a large, independent judiciary and leading to conflicts over constitutional interpretations.

How do the roles and jurisdictions of trial courts of limited jurisdiction differ from those of general jurisdiction within state court systems?

Trial courts of limited jurisdiction manage minor cases such as misdemeanors and small civil disputes, whereas courts of general jurisdiction handle more serious criminal and civil cases

In the case of Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, what critical issue did the Supreme Court address regarding the relationship between federal and state courts?

Whether the U.S. Supreme Court has the authority to review decisions made by state courts that involve federal law.

The Judiciary Act of 1789

Established the lower federal courts

Jurisdiction stripping

Congress limits the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear certain types of cases. it is subject to constitutional limitations, particularly when it comes to fundamental rights and the separation of powers

Congress authorities regarding the federal courts

Can establish more courts, and number of judges in each Court

Can Congress affect Judiciary decisions?

no, but Congress can propose an amendment in order to change a holding by the Supreme court. Congress has significant authority to affect Federal Court decisions, but cannot alter final judgments

Prohibition of bills of attainder

Congress is prohibited from passing legislation which applies either to a named individual or to easily determined members of a group

The adversarial system

A system where two opposing parties present their case before an impartial judge or jury, common law countries

Inquisitorial system

A judge is responsible for supervising the gathering of evidence to resolve disputes and attorneys play more of a passive role, civil law countries

Features of an adversarial system

impartial decision maker, confrontation and cross-examination of witness, right against self-incrimination, and right to assistance of counsel 

Confrontation clause

ensuring that defendants are given the opportunity to face their accusers in court and challenge the evidence presented against them

To what does the right against self incrimination apply to

Compulsory testimonial Acts (an action or process in which an individual is legally compelled to testify or provide evidence, typically in the form of a statement or testimony, during legal proceedings)

What is different about voluntarily being a witness

You do not have the Fifth Amendment right

When do the Miranda Rights kick in?

When you are in custody or being interrogated

When is Counsel provided

Only in criminal cases if wanted, but not for appeals, misdemeanors or civil cases

the key distinction between the origins of the adversarial and inquisitorial systems as discussed in historical accounts

The adversarial system, tracing back to ancient Greece and Rome, focused on public and oral contests between parties, unlike the inquisitorial system which originated in imperial Rome with secretive and written procedures

Product of a grand jury

An indictment

Product of a trial jury

a verdict

What is the process through which potential jurors are questioned

voir dire

What are potential problems with jury selection

race cannot be a factor and unconscious bias

Do jury decisions have to be unanimous

All cases must be unanimous except for a state civil cases, but not specifically mentioned in the constitution

What happens if a verdict cannot be reached

It's called a hung jury; an additional hearing could be added or the judge can declare a mistrial.

Civil case mistrial

plaintiff either drops the suit or retry the case

Criminal case mistrial

Prosecutor dismisses the charges, Plea bargain, or the defendant will be tried again; Double Jeopardy only applies if the defendant is found not guilty

Jury nullification

a jury returns a verdict of "not guilty" despite evidence that would support a conviction, based on the jury’s belief that the law itself is unjust or that its application in the case is inappropriate

When does the right to a criminal jury apply

no constitutional right to a jury trial in juvenile proceedings, and under the Sixth Amendment, only crimes that carry a potential sentence of more than 6 months imprisonment

Strengths of the American juries

Jurors typically understand the evidence and come to conclusions

Weaknesses of American juries

Imposes cost in time and money, delay in the Machinery of justice, and untrained jurors are less adept at reaching accurate conclusions

What is the purpose of grand jury secrecy

protects Grand jurors from pressures by the person being investigated, encourages witnesses to give full and truthful info, prevents tampering, prevents disclosure of the investigation if the case gets dismissed

Describe the function and procedural aspects of a federal grand jury

A federal grand jury decides if there is probable cause to believe a crime has been committed and if someone should be indicted, hearing primarily the evidence presented by a government attorney

counterclaim

A claim by the defendant against the plaintiff saying the plaintiff injured them in some way

What happens if the defendant fails to answer a summon within the allotted time

a default judgment may be awarded, providing the plaintiff with the relief requested in the complaint

Discovery

allows both parties to gather information from each other using methods such as depositions, interrogations, and production of documents to prepare for trial

What is it called when a lawyer can object a juror with reasoning

challenge for cause

What is it called when a lawyer objects a juror without needing reasoning

peremptory challenges

What is the criminal justice process?

It varies between federal and state levels, with each jurisdiction following its own set of procedures influenced by constitutional mandates, legislative enactments, and judicial discretion

Arraignment

the process in which the defendant is brought before a judge to respond to the grand jury indictment or the prosecutor’s bill of information.

Describe the arraignment process

During the arraignment, the defendant is formally presented with the charges, informed of their rights, and enters a plea, such as guilty, not guilty, not guilty by reason of insanity, or nolo contendere (the accused does not deny the facts of the case but claims that he or she has not committed any crime)