Ap Gov - (Unit 2, CH 6 Quiz)

• Explain how state and federal judges are selected differently AND how the state practice is unique in terms of global comparisons.

  1.  Federal judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

  2. State judges are ¨helped¨ to get elected. 

  3.  Today, the United States is the only country in the world that elects judges.

• Describe the role of money in state judicial elections over the course of the last three decades.

  1.  More and more money has been flooded into state judicial election campaigns, and concerns of judicial independence being threatened has risen.

  2. People are donating more and more money to get people elected, this can create a bias. 

• Explain the background, decision, and significance of Caperton v. Massey Coal Co.

  1. Background The case hinged on the role that Don Blankenship, the head of Massey Coal, played in the election of one of the justices of the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, the state's highest court, because after the election Blankenship´s case went before the court. 

  2. Blankenship spent 3 million to get someone elected as a state judge in West Virginia. Blankenship's lawsuit was going to be in the courtroom of the guy he got elected. 

  3. Decision The judge could not preside over the case. (Bias)

  4. Significance  The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the appearance of a conflict of interest due to the extraordinary campaign contributions made by Donald Blankenship required Justice Brent Benjamin to recuse from hearing the case. The failure to do so violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Judicial independence was reinforced. 

• What is the purpose of the appointment and confirmation process of federal judges?

  1.  The Constitution requires that all federal judges be appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. This process is meant to insulate federal judges from the kind of politics involved in the Blankenship case. Nevertheless, the appointment of federal judges remains political. Insulate judges from political pressure. No need to campaign and ask for ¨favors¨

• What made the appointment of Sonia Sotomayor one of the “riskiest choices” Obama could have made? (To understand the “identity” part of the question, read ahead two paragraphs).

  1.  According to the WAshington Post, the ¨riskiest choice¨ of all likely nominees, largely because of public remarks that she had made on the importance of identity and personal history in approaching judicial decision making. She had made comments about her decisions taking into account her own identity. (women, race, religion) ¨follow the constitution, not your identity¨

• How did Senate Republicans prepare to criticize Sotomayor?

  1.  REpublicans in the SEnate were prepared to criticize Sotomayor as a justice who would be willing to expand constitutional rights beyond the text of the Constitution. Given a popular president and a Senate under Democratic control, though, defeating Sotomayor was unlikely. Senate republicans pushed back on her religious ideas. Did not push back too hard, did not want to lose women and latino republican voters.

• What delicate balance did Senate Republicans have to take concerning the confirmation hearing of Sotomayor?

  1.  REpublicans in the Senate hoped to use the confirmation proceedings to increase their support among conservative voters.

• Was Sotomayor confirmed by the Senate?  Explain.

  1.  Yes, in a 13-6 vote, with one Republican joining to unanimous Democrats, the committee approved her nomination and sent it to the full Senate. Shortly thereafter, the Senate confirmed Sotomayor's appointment to th eSupreme Court by a vote of 68-31.

Section 2

1. What were four agreements the delegates to the Constitutional Convention had concerning the federal judiciary?

   1.   Retain a degree of independence from the other two branches.

   2.  They also agreed that judges should be allowed lifetime tenure, with the condition of ¨good behavior.¨

   3.  They made provisions to protect judicial salaries from efforts to reduce them by an unhappy or vengeful Congress.

   4. The president would nominate federal; judges, and the Senate - through its role of advice and consent - would confirm the nominations.

2. Which federal court is the only court created by the Constitution?

   1.  The Supreme Court ¨SCOTUS¨

3. Which branch of government was left to determine any remaining federal courts?

   1.  Congress

4. Explain the difference between:

   1. Original jurisdiction The authority of a court to act as the first court to hear a case, which includes the finding of facts in the case. 1. Where a case starts. 2. Determine facts in a case. 3. Where innocence or guilt and/or damages are decided.

   2. Appellate jurisdiction the authority of a court to hear and review decisions made by lower courts in that system. When a case is being reviewed by a lower court. Something in the lower court was done wrong.

5. Answer the AP Political Science Practice Questions (Analyzing Visual Information: The Presentation of the Supreme Court) from page 191 (Photos of Justices) below.

   1.  neutral

   2.  joyful

   3.  Posed vs. natural

6. How did “Brutus” argue against the Supreme Court during the debate over the ratification of the Constitution?  Was/is there any validity, in your opinion, to Brutus’ argument?

   1.  Antifederalists feared that the growth of the national government through an increasingly powerful judiciary would diminish the rights of states and individuals. Brutus 11. The court would have unlimited power because they had the ability to declare things constitutional or unconstitutional. Federal government had too much power.

   2.  Yes.

7. What was the MAIN purpose of Federalist No. 78?

   1. Argument by Alexander Hamilton that the federal judiciary would be unlikely to infringe upon rights and liberties by would serve as a check on the other two branches. Why the federal court system would not trample on the rights of the people.

8. How did Hamilton argue in Federalist No. 78 that the Supreme Court was not as much of a threat to liberty as congress and the president?

   1. Argument by Alexander Hamilton that the federal judiciary would be unlikely to infringe upon rights and liberties by would serve as a check on the other two branches. Appointing and life terms: not subject to political pressure at all.

   2. He says ¨the court has only the power of judgement, not the power of the sword or the purse. ¨

9. Answer the AP Political Science Practices: Interpreting Foundational Documents on page 192.  (Federalist No. 78).

   1.  Strong

   2.  Strong

   3.  Their position holds a lot of power with checks and balances.

   4.  no.

10. Place an image of Figure 6.1 here.

11. What was the general purpose of the Judiciary Act  of 1789?

    1.  The Judiciary Act of 1789 allowed Congress to flesh out the organization of the court system. Created the court of appeals and the district courts. 9 justices today.

12. What is the only court position described in the Constitution? 

    1.  Only the chief justice of the SUpreme Court is mentioned in the Constitution; the document does not specify the number of justices in the Court, instead leaving the decision to Congress. 

13. MISC.

    1. Presidents can leave a lasting legacy depending on how many justices they appoint.

       1. Trump appointed 3 (⅓ of the Supreme Court).

    2. Decisions are much closer than they used to be. More partisan.

    3. No qualifications to be a judge. (Checked with the Senate)

    4. The chief justice can be a new member of the court or have previous experience.

    5. All of these people that are nominated and confirmed are vetted  (they leave no stone unturned in your life) Confirmation hearing. Anything in your life is up for questioning.

    6. Why was the case of Marbury v. Madison so important to the Supreme Court’s future?

       1.  Had huge effects on the power and prestige of the federal judiciary.

    7. Briefly describe the background, find, and result of the 1800 presidential election.

       1.  This case was about politics. The last election decided by the House of Representatives was in 1824. 

    8. How many votes does each state get in the House of Representatives if the House decides the presidential election?

       1.  Each state delegation receives one vote

    9. How was the Federalist’s actions of attempting to stack the court with “their” people similar to what presidents might think today when making appointments to the judiciary?

       1.  They put their party in and probably someone with the same ideas. 

    10. What were two major provisions of the Judiciary Act of 1801?

        1.  Expanding the number of federal judges Changed the number of Scotus Justices of 6 to 5

        2.  Recognized the lower federal courts in a way to create sixteen vacancies that were promptly filled by Adams administration. Midnight Appointments

    11. In your opinion, was Jefferson right or wrong for not delivering some of the signed and sealed commissions that had been created under President Adams?

        1.  Wrong because that ruins the opportunity for other people and I learned that is against their rights too.

    12. What was John Marshall’s greatest legacy to the Supreme Court?

        1.  Longest serving chief justice and worked to strengthen the power of the national government and the independence of the judicial branch

    13. Read the section, “Marbury v. Madison, and the Establishment of Judicial Review.”  For each paragraph, write at least one sentence that summarizes the paragraph.

        1.  Writ of mandamus and how the Court didn’t have the power to right one. This came up because Marury wanted to force the Court to look and their commission but that never happened. 

        2.  The Judiciary Act violated the COurt powers due to the Constitution. Marshall then established that the SUpreme Court has the power of judicial review. 

    14. Do you think that the federal judiciary should have the power of judicial review?  Explain your reasoning.

        1.  Yes because it helped expanded the Court's power to interpret the Constitution

    15. How did Marshall argue that the court made the proper decision in establishing judicial review?

        1.   Due to the fact in the Constitution the Supreme Court was supreme to all three branches but before judicial review it made all branches coequal. It made the Judicial branch co-equal with the other branches. Without Judicial Review the Court didn’t have any power. This gave them power. 

    16. What had Hamilton written about the concept of judicial review in Federalist No. 78?

        1.  That it was necessary to preserve the Constitution. The Court could “pronounce legislative acts void” (declare thing unconstitutional)

    17. When was the next time the Supreme Court declared an act of the federal government as unconstitutional?  Explain what happened in that one.

        1.  1857, Dred Scott v. Sandford which was one of the worst decisions in Supreme Court history. Dred Scott was a slave and sued his owner for taking him to a free state. The US Supreme Court said that he “wasn’t a human with no rights” SLaves r property w no right and shouldn’t be able to make a lawsuit

        2.  The Court ruled that former slaves taken into free state did not have standing to sue for their freedom because they were not citizens under the Constitution.

        3. Name the two separate court systems in the U.S.

           1. The  federal and the state level. 

        4. Describe the difference between criminal and civil law

           1.  Criminal law - hurts a community

           2.  Civil law - covers arguments/disputes involving private rights and relationships between individuals and groups

        5. What are the constitutional protections found in the Fifth and Sixth Amendments

           1.  Criminal cases are guaranteed a set of constitutional protections (5th)

           2. If person was found not guilty then they are protected from being accused again

           3.  The right to a fast public trail by a jury, to confront witnesses, and right to be represented by an attorney 

           4. Speedy trial, public trial (not be held in secret), confront witness, you have the ability to have attorney appointed for you 

        6. Explain the difference between a plaintiff and a defendant.

           1.  Plaintiff; party that argues that they have been wronged (1st person). Defendant; Ppl being sued (2nd person) 

        7. Include an image of Figure 6.2 (YOU HAVE TO KNOW)

        8. When can a case move from a state court system to a federal court system?

           1.  A question arising under the Constitution. Yes, it has to be a question abt constitution or individual civil rights are being denied. 

        9. Answer the following concerning federal district courts.

           1. Of the three levels of federal courts, where do the federal district courts sit? Lowest. 

           2. When were these courts created? 1789

           3. How many district courts are there? 94

           4. What is the purpose of district courts? Determines guilt or innocence. 

           5. What is the only type of jurisdiction held by the district courts? Handles most federal courts (where everything mainly gets done). Only state here. 

        10. Answer the following concerning appellate courts

            1. Of the three levels of federal courts, where do federal courts of appeal sit? Middle. 

            2. How many courts of appeals are at the federal level? 13

            3. What type of jurisdiction do appellate courts hold? Internationsional trade and appellate jurisdiction only. Cases can only be appealed there 

        11. Answer the following concerning the Supreme Court.

            1. What are two types of disputes the Supreme Court is designed to resolve?

               1.  Something that had not been provided in the government

               2.  Differences between the states

               3. Also different interpretations of the law in the lower federal courts

               4. State v. State

               5. To solve discrepancies between how laws are determined 

            2. When does the court meet on an annual basis? 9 months. Start in October

            3. When does the court hold original jurisdiction? In cases affecting ambassadors, when states are involved, and whenever something has to be decided fast. 

            4. What types of jurisdiction does the Supreme Court hold? Letter C above

            5. What are the two questions that the Supreme Court is confronted with when taking a case? 

               1.  Whether to even hear the case or not

               2.  If it does decide to hear, why?

        
        

        6. How many cases are appealed to the Supreme Court every year?  How many are “heard”?

           1. Average 8,000 ot 9,000 per year 

           2.  Less than 1% are actually listened too (80 at most)

        7. Explain the “rule of four”. If 4 or more justices want to hear, they will do so

        8. What is a writ of certiorari? Supreme Court writes letters to lower court to hear records of the case

        9. What are the three types of cases most likely to be heard by the Supreme Court?

           1. A question involving the Constitution and ppl rights 

           2.  A different interpretation of a law by lower courts 

           3.  If a case needs to set a precedent for the future 

        10. Define precedent - a decision the influences deciding similar cases in the future

        11. Define stare decisis - Letting a previous legal decision stand, don’t change anything

        10. Explain the following when the court considers and decides on cases.

            1. Brief (may have to look this up) written documents by attorneys and present their legal arguments to the court. Your argument in writing to the justices in Supreme Court

            2. Amicus curiae brief - to try to influence the precedential effect of the Court's ruling. “Friend of court brief” chime in on their opinion to think how the court should decide

            3. Oral arguments - where each side in court gets normally a half of an hour to present. Lawyers for plantant and defended go in an argument for half an hour

            4. Judicial Conference - justices meet and vote in secret

        11. Define each of the following

            1. Majority opinion - binding of Supreme Court opinions, which serve as precedent for future cases

            2. Concurring opinion - agree with majority opinion, but adds different or additional reasoning

            3. Dissenting opinion - disagree with majority opinion, doesn’t serve as precedent 

        12. How can a dissenting opinion have an impact in the future?  If a future Court revisits precedent, a dissent could provide a record and analysis of why at least one justice thought the Court got it wrong the first time. They could be used to overturn a case

        
        

        Section 5

        
        

        1. Just read the introduction to the section.  No questions.

        2. Explain the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint.

           1.   Judicial restraint; constitutional interpretation that justice should be cautious in overturning laws

           2.  Judicial Activism; constitutional interpretation that justices should sometimes create bold new policies

        3. Should judicial activism and judicial restraint be connected to liberalism and/or conservatism?  Explain.

           1. No 

           2.  For example, an activist and liberal Court used the power of judicial review to strike down state law restricting the civil rights of Americans in areas of education and voting. But then conservative courts have used activism to protect the rights of states and private businesses. People can’t just agree on whether or not a decision represent judicial activism or restraint

        4. How can the following check the power of the judiciary?

           1. Executive - The president nominates justices and the Senate confirms them. Nominates justices

           2. Legislative - Congress sets the size of the Supreme Court and establishes other federal courts Senate confirms justices, set numbers on justices on Supreme Court, and established the number of courts, ,

           3. Legislative & States - Congress and the state may collectively amend the ConstitutionWork together can work together to revoke a decision

        5. Explain President Andrew Jackson’s response to the Supreme Court’s decision in Worcester v. Georgia.

           1. He enforced it and continued his destructive policies toward the Cherokee Nation. The Supreme COurt can make a decision but the President has to enforce it. 

        6. Explain how the legislative and executive branches somewhat defied the judiciary following the Brown v. Board of Education case.

           1. They began to use their own powers in shaping American public policy that desegregation gained momentum. 

        What is meant by the statement, “a court decision may resolve the (controversial) issue.  Providing political cover for elected representatives who wish to act on an issue may be one of the most important powers of the unelected branch of government?”

        2. A court deciding a decision will provide political coverage and whoever wants to act on that issue can take credit which would be important to them since they are unelected. Laws aren’t as strong as constitution

        
        
        

        7. Explain the following quote: “The federal judiciary has only the power of its decisions and the willingness of the people and the members of the other two branches to respect its decisions.  It cannot write laws and it has no army”

        The judiciary branch is the least powerful branch compared to the other two branches. Federalist 78