Untitled Flashcards Set

Jurisdiction

The authority/right to hear and decide a case.

Precedent

A court decision that guides future cases that ask similar questions.

Majority Opinion

An appellate opinion supporting the court's judgment which receives a majority vote of the justices or judges.

Original Jurisdiction

The authority to be the first court to hear a case.

Stare Decisis

Legal term that means 'to stand by things decided' or to apply precedent when faced with similar legal issues.

Dissenting Opinion

An opinion written by a judge who disagrees with the majority opinion in a case.

Appellate Jurisdiction

The authority to review and potentially overrule the decision of a lower court acting on original jurisdiction.

Supreme Court

The highest Court in the land that makes decisions all other courts in the country must follow.

Concurring Opinion

An opinion that agrees with the majority opinion but does not agree with the rationale behind it.

Mandatory Jurisdiction

A court must hear every case filed with it.

Certiorari Petition

A petition that asks an appellate court to grant a writ of certiorari to review a lower court's decision.

Originalism/Original Intent

The Constitution should be interpreted as narrowly as possible, focusing on the Founders' intentions.

Discretionary Jurisdiction

A court gets to pick and choose which cases it hears.

Writ of Certiorari

Requests the records of a past case from the lower court.

Non-originalism/Living Constitutionalism

The Constitution should be interpreted flexibly, especially regarding modern questions.

Dual Court System

The coexistence of federal and state court systems in the United States.

Rule of Four

To hear a case, 4 of the 9 Justices must agree.

Judicial Activism

Judges who are more willing to strike down laws and set new precedents.

Judicial Review

The power of the judiciary to determine whether actions of other branches are constitutional.

Amicus Curiae Brief

Briefs written by non-involved individuals or groups to assist a court's decision.

Judicial Restraint

Judges defer to elected branches and precedent, striking down laws only when they clearly violate the Constitution.

Article III of the constitution

establishes the judicial branch of the United States government, outlining the powers and limitations of federal courts.

Federalist 78

is an essay by Alexander Hamilton that discusses the role of the judiciary in the American government, emphasizing the importance of an independent judiciary and the principle of judicial review.

Brutus No.15

is an anti-Federalist essay that critiques the proposed Constitution, arguing against the establishment of a strong federal judiciary and warning of potential abuses of power.

argues that the proposed U.S. Constitution gives the Supreme Court too much power by allowing them to interpret the Constitution without any effective check,

Marbury V Madison (1803)

-helped to establish judicial review.

-The ruling said that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and established the Supreme Court as the final authority for interpreting it.
-This decision elevated the judicial branch to be an equal partner with the executive and legislative branches.

-The decision in Marbury v. Madison greatly expanded the Supreme Court’s powers.”

What is judicial review, and how does it check the power of other institutions and state governments?

Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to determine whether the actions of other branches are constitutional.

• Actions judged inconsistent are declared unconstitutional and, therefore, null and void.

• It is not a power given to the courts in Article III.

• It is something the Founders had a concept of.

• It is something Hamilton references in Fed. 78; he implies a belief that the Court will indeed have this power.

How and why does the exercise of judicial review in conjunction with life tenure inform debate about the legitimacy of the Supreme Court’s power?

• Federalist 78  and Brutus No. 15 

• The combination of judicial review and life tenure in the Supreme Court can lead to debates about its legitimacy due to concerns over unaccountability and potential ideological bias, precedent

What is the debate about originalism and non-originalism (living constitutionalism) about? What are the arguments advanced in favor of either side? 

• Originalists argue that the meaning of the constitutional text is fixed and that it should bind constitutional actors. Living constitutionalists contend that constitutional law can and should evolve in response to changing circumstances and values.

How can the other branches in the government check the Supreme Court’s power?

• Congress can pass legislation to attempt to limit the Court's power: by changing the Court's jurisdiction; by modifying the impact of a Court decision after it has been made; or by amending the Constitution in relation to the Court.

• Congress can determine amount of judges and establish lower courts 

What role do interest groups play in our judicial system? 

• Interest groups work to influence the courts in a number of ways. Interest groups often file amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs, presenting an argument in favor of a particular issue. Sometimes interest groups file lawsuits against the government or other parties.

How does the role of legal precedent affect judicial decision making? 

Legal precedents play an important role in decision-making and aids the judicial officers in referring to similar case laws, ultimately saving time and scrutinizing results. And of course, it's usually a research paralegal or associate tasked with a case law study and discovery concerning a legal matter.

How can other branches in the government limit the Supreme Court’s power? 

• Congress can pass legislation to attempt to limit the Court's power: by changing the Court's jurisdiction; by modifying the impact of a Court decision after it has been made; or by amending the Constitution in relation to the Court.