ap gov chapter 14

common law

judge made law that oreinted in england from decisions shaped accoridng to prevaling custom. decisions wee appied to similar situations and gradually became common to the nation

• befroe this the judgs just made up laws as courts increased

precedent

court rule bearing on subsequent legal decisions in similar cases. judges rely on precedents in deciding cases, past court ruling

• embodied in stare decisis (stand on decided case)

stare decisis

to stand on decidied cases. the judical policy of following precedents established by past decisions

• obligates judges to follow precedents, by own courts or higher courts

• lower courts not obligated to follow higher court from another state, state courts are independent and state law is overpowering in state territory

• sc decides on issue = law of the land

• follows constition, also law of land, anything not C is not enforceable

case law

judical interpretations of common law docterines and princibles as well as interpretations of C law, statuatroy law and administrative law

• up to sc to decide what a constitutional povision or statuatroy phrase means

statues and admin regulations

• fed statues may relate any issue as a concern of fed gov, ex. taxation

• state statues include criminal codes or commercial laws

• local statues = ordinences, public safety

• other source of law come from admin agencies

judicial review

• process of declaring whether a law is contrary to the mandates of the C, if stuff is Consitutional or not

• established in marbury v madison, john marhsall

• sc uses in separation of powers

• if a fed court declares that a fed/state law/policy is not constitutional, courts decision effects application of law/policy only within courts jurisdiction

  • ex. higher level court = higher impact

  • sc said arkansas state C amendment that limiting terms of congresspersons was not constitutional, applies to all other states in US

juristican

authority of a court to decide certian cases. not all courts have the authority to decide all cases. 2 juristictional issues are where a case arises and its subject matter

• fed courts only have fed juristican

federal question

question that has to do with the constitution, acts of congress or treaties. provides basis for fed juristican

• ex. perosns c rights have been violated

diversity and citizenship

exists when parties to a lawsuit are citizens of diff states or when the suit involves a us citizen and gov/citizen of another country. diversity of citizenship can proviide a basis for fed juristican

fed juristican

amt must be 75000 before a fed court can take jurisitacan in diversity case

trial court

court in which most cases begin, testimonies

• bankruptcy, district, federal claims, international trade courts

general juristican

exists when a courts authority to hear a case is not restricted, hears abt a broad raneg of topics

• us distrcit courts are courts of general juristican, mostly federal cases on any matter

limited juristican

exists when a courts authority to hear cases is restricted to certin type of claims, ex. tax or bankruptcy

apellate courts

courts having juristican to review cases and issues orginigally tried in lower couts

• starts in district, appeals sent to court of appeals

• e.x state boundries

• has curcuit of appeals and court of appeals for he fed circut

court of appeals

• 12/13 courts hear appeals from fed district courts in their respective judicial circuts

  • includes district of colombia

  • dc has its own district, has juristican over cases involving patent law and in cases wh us gov is defendent

• appalate court doesnt have trial power, they have a pannal of judges review i and see if the trial court made an error. they challenge the trial courts decision if the evidence doesnt suppot it

• question of law not fact

• sc can review but usually decisions are final

sc

• artilce 3

• since 1869

• used to be 6 judges

• begins terms in otc and ajounrs in june/july

• only takes 0.5% of cases

• select case at random, depend on if the legal action was denied on differently by diff courtsn, or needs regulation, or if the issue could have significance

specialzed fed court and war on terrorism

• fisfa court

  • foreign intellegence survallance act 1978: established a court to hear requests for warrents for the survellince of suspected spies, can request warrent w/o revealing spy to public

  • 7 judges, no records

• 1995 anti terrorism act created alien removal courts, see if there is probable cause for deportation and doesnt follow normal criminal case proceuders

  • sc said enemies who are citizens cant be denied due process

litigate

engage in a leagal proceeding or seek releif in court of law, to carry on a lawsuit

• plaintifs litigate lawsuits, defendent is who its against

class action suit

lawsuit filled by an indevidual seeking damages for all persons similary situated

• groups like NAACP used, thought court would be more sympathetic

procedural rules

• courts make rules to keep orders, protect interest of parties, keep litigation fair

• dont follow = contempt, fines

civil contempt

failing to comply with costs order for benefit of another party

criminal contempt

obstructing administration of justice or disrspet it

soliceter general

high ranking presidentail appointee in justice dep,represents ng in sc, has influence over cases

writ of certorari

order issues by a higher court to a lower court to send the record of the case for review

• more than 90% denied, denial has no value as a precedent

rule of 4

sc procudire by which 4 justices must vote to grant a petition for review if a case is to come before the full court

• for deciding cases, tne court grants cetorari, justcies and 4 law clerks do resarch, no evidence only summaries

oral arguments

verbal arguments presented in person by attounreys to appelate court. each auttorney presents reasons to court why the court should rule in his clients favor

• justices meet, talk + vote if they wanna grant cetrorari

• no record

opinion

statement by a judge/court of the decision reached in a case. the opinion sets forth applicable law and detiales the reasoning on which the ruling was based

affirm

declare that a court ruling is valid and must stand

reversed

to annul or make void of a court ruling on account of some error or iregularity

remand

send a case back to courts that orgininally heard it

• district court affirms, sc can reverse

unanomous opinion

court opinion/dtermination on which all judges agree m

majority opinion

court opinion reflecting views of the majority of judges

concurring opiniont

seprate opinion prepared by a judge who supports the decision of the majority of the court but who wants to voice dissaproval on the grounds of which the decision was made

dissenting opinion

seperate opinion in which a judge dissents from the conclusion reached by the majority on the court and explains their own views abt the case

• forms bias of arguments used in later years to reverse decision

judicial appointments

• article 2 section 2 says pres appoints sc judges wh consent of Senate, serve 4 life

• candidates suggested by dep justice, senators, judges, interest groups, etc

• pres looks at skill, political party

• pres nominated someone to senate, senate confirms or denies, and senate judiciary committee invites testimony

  • congress didn't act when Obama wanted to put in democrat garland as a replacement cause repub trump was coming in and they wanted to put in a repub

senatorial courtesy

fed district court judgeship nominates, a tradition allowing a senator to veto a judicial appointment in their state

• senators can veto a fed district court on their state, not return the “blue slip”, mostly use opposition party

• pres does fed district nominations but senators have been nominated for their state of there was a vacancy. Carter made commissions to oversee the nomination process, reagan undid

• pres nominates court of appeals, more carefully and controlled

chief justice

head who interprets the law, also chief ex officer of the judicial part of the bureaucracy, chair of judicial conference (sets priorities for fed judiciary), oversees budget and appoints director of a mind office of US

partisanship and judicial appointments

• pres likes judges who their same political views

• being a judge is a good way to make institutional change longterm

• judges can shift views once on the sc (like party)

the senates role

• senate also take In ideology, reject 20% of sc court nominations

• senate refusing to confirm ppl in andrew jacksons era to 1960s

• tension between pres and Senate for federal district courts, see the courts as agents for social change and ideology plays a big role

judicial activism

doctrine holding that the sc should take a active role by using its powers to check activities of gov bodies when these bodies exceed their authorities

• active era, chief justice warren, civil rights

judicial restraint

doctrine including that sc should defer to the decisions made by elected representatives of the people in leg and ex branches

• sc shouldn’t thrawrt law unless unconstitutional

• defer to experts in admin agencies

struct construction

“letter of the law”, when interpreting constitutional particular statute

• conservatives

broad constructionists

looks to the context and purpose of a law when making an interpretation

• liberals

rehnquist court

• under rehnquist court, was more conservative wh 3 very conserv justices, 2 sings (mostly conserv) and 4 liberalas under hw bush

• not always predictable, said Congress overreached power wh 1995 gun control issue and upheld congress power under marijuana clause which was giving liberal

roberts court

• roberts more moderate than conserv

• worked on controversial stuff like allowing police to look at immigration status in az or individual mandate to buy heath insurance under aca act

• overall coserv, gay marriage denied

• more likely to vote based on policy preferences rather than considering activism or restraint

judicial implementation

the way in which court decisions are translated into action

• sc doesnt control enforcement of judicial decisions but if pres refuses to enforce that would look bad on pres cause sc is seen so highly

• pres checks judicial by appointing or having the solicitor general role

• state ex might disagree wh court

  • little rock

legislative checks

• courts make rulings and legislative makes laws and $ to enforce and checks judical by not doing so

• amendments at state and fed level overturn court rulings

  • ex. 14 and 24 check courts ability to reject discrimination

• congress or state leg can rewrite laws and create new laws to outdo courts rulings

political question

issue that a court belvies should be decided by the ex or leg branch

• higher courts checking lower by reversing lower court decisions, lower courts ignore higher orders, each ppl interpret law differently

public role

• sc seen as high standing

• ppls opinions important, can pressure pres into doing something or enforce something

• courts avoid issues that are hot topics, can loose standing if goes against public opinion

path of court cases

1. district →court of appeals →SC

2. trial →intermediate appeals court →state supreme court →SC

fed court jurisdiction/ involve

• 2 or more states

• federal crimes

• bankruptcy

• copyright, trademark

• banking regulation

state court involves

• interpretation of state constitution

• state criminal offense

• family law

• sale of goods

• businesses

• election issues

precdent v decision

A decision is a single ruling in a specific court case, while precedent is the legal principle or rule from a past decision that serves as a binding example for future, similar cases, requiring courts to maintain consistency (stare decisis). So, a decision becomes precedent when its legal reasoning is applied to future disputes with comparable facts or issues, guiding subsequent judges.