unit three review: the judicial branch, civil rights, and civil liberties

overview

the judicial branch

• The federal judiciary, including the Supreme Court, established under Article III, is designed to be an independent branch of government.

  • The Court’s most far-reaching power, judicial review, was justified in Marbury v. Madison (1803), where the Court declared that it had the constitutional authority to overturn acts of Congress, state laws, or executive action deemed to be unconstitutional. Thus, judicial review serves as an important check on other branches of government.

• Appointed for life, justices are somewhat insulated from public opinion. It is not surprising that over the years the Court has handed down decisions that have been unpopular and controversial.

• Congress and the president may influence the Court through the appointment process, by refusing to implement a Court decision, or by passing legislation that changes the Court’s jurisdiction.

  </p>

civil rights and civil liberties

• The Constitution, but especially the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment, are used to assert the rights of citizens and protect groups from discrimination.
  • As such, the government must respect the dignity of the person and assure equal treatment, with its power constrained in the process of protecting individual freedoms.
• The Fourteenth Amendment includes two clauses that affirm and protect civil rights and liberties—the due process clause and the equal protection clause.
• The courts must balance the desire for social order with the protection of individual rights and freedoms when considering due process and equal protection challenges.
• In a process known as selective incorporation, the Supreme Court has used the power of judicial review to interpret the due process clause in such a way as to prevent states from unduly restricting fundamental freedoms.
  • The Court has been called upon to interpret protections for freedom of political expression and religious exercise, the right to bear arms, the right of privacy, and the rights necessary to ensure that those accused of crimes receive a fair trial.

\
essential questions

• How do the branches of the national government compete and cooperate in order to govern?
• To what extent have changes in the powers of each branch affected how responsive and accountable the national government is in the 21st century?
• To what extent do the U.S. Constitution and its amendments protect against undue government infringement on essential liberties and from invidious discrimination?
• How have U.S. Supreme Court rulings defined civil liberties and civil rights?

structure and functions of the judicial branch

^^Big Idea #1: The design of the judicial branch protects the Supreme Court’s independence as a branch of government, and the emergence and use of judicial review remains a powerful judicial practice.^^

judicial decision making: the importance of precedents and stare decisis

\
court ideologies

• loose constructionism: One favoring a liberal construction of the Constitution of the U.S. to give broader powers to the federal government…broad government actions on things like health care which is not mentioned in the Constitution would be an example Loose constructionism looks to what someone thinks was the "intent" of the framers' language and expands and interprets the language extensively to meet current standards of human society today.
• strict constructionism: Interpreting the Constitution based on a literal and narrow definition of the text without reference to the differences in conditions when the Constitution was written and modern conditions, inventions and societal changes

\
politics and the power of the supreme court

• judicial activism: The view that Supreme Court justices (and even other lower-ranking judges) can and should interpret the texts of the Constitution and laws in order to serve the judges' own estimates of the needs of society when the elected branches of the Federal government and/or the various state governments seem to them to be failing to meet those needs.
• judicial restraint: The view that the Supreme Court (and other courts) should not read their own philosophies or policy preferences into the Constitution and laws and should whenever reasonably possible interpret the law so as to avoid second guessing the policy decisions made by other governmental institutions such as Congress, the President and state governments within their constitutional spheres of authority. Judges should defer to the decisions of the elected "political" branches of the Federal government and of the states in matters of policy making.

\
checks and balances of the supreme court

civil rights and civil liberties

^^Big Idea #2: Provisions of the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights are continually being interpreted to balance the power of government and the civil liberties of individuals.^^

• civil liberties: Individual freedoms given to citizens as protection against government interference
• civil rights: Protections from unequal treatment by government for possessing certain characteristics such as race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, etc.
• The U.S. Constitution includes a Bill of Rights specifically designed to protect individual liberties and rights.
• Civil rights are guaranteed to all citizens under the due process and equal protection clauses of the U.S. Constitution, as well as acts of Congress.
• The application of the Bill of Rights is continuously interpreted by the courts.

\
the first amendment

• freedom of religion
  • establishment clause: Prohibits government from making any law that establishes religion.  What constitutes establishment has been settled on a case by case basis by the Supreme Court over the years. 
  • free exercise clause: Prohibits government from making any law that restricts a person from freely practicing their religion.  What constitutes free exercise has been settled on a case by case basis by the Supreme Court over the years.

• The interpretation and application of the First Amendment’s establishment and free exercise clauses reflect an ongoing debate over balancing majoritarian religions practice and free exercise.
• The Supreme Court has on occasion ruled in favor of states’ power to restrict individual liberty; for example, when speech can be shown to increase the danger to public safety.

selective incorporation

^^Big Idea #3: Protections of the Bill of Rights have been selectively incorporated by way of the Fourteenth Amendment’s due process clause to prevent state infringement of basic liberties.^^

• selective incorporation: The part by part application of the Bill of Rights to state and local government through court decisions
• due process: The requirement that citizens accused of crimes are given fair treatment throughout the entire criminal process from arrest through trial and potentially appeal
• equal protection: Clause in the 14th Amendment that guarantees all citizens are to receive equal protection under the law.  Has been interpreted broadly to include many protections that aren’t otherwise specifically spelled out in the Constitution.

equal protection

^^Big Idea #4: The Fourteenth Amendment’s equal protection clause as well as other constitutional provisions have often been used to support the advancement of equality.^^

legality of civil rights

 ^^Big Idea #5: Public policy promoting civil rights is influenced by citizen–state interactions and constitutional interpretation over time.^^

court interpretations of the constitution

^^Big Idea #6: The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the U.S. Constitution is influenced by the composition of the Court and citizen–state interactions. At times, it has restricted minority rights and, at others, protected them.^^ 

• The debate on affirmative action includes justices who insist that the Constitution is colorblind and those who maintain that it forbids only racial classifications designed to harm minorities, not help them.
  • Decisions demonstrating that minority rights have been restricted at times and protected at other times include:
  • The Supreme Court upholding the rights of the majority in cases that limit and prohibit majority-minority districting

\