supreme court Flashcards
judicial review
the supreme court uses this to rule on whether state law, federal law or the actions of any branch of gov have been unconstitutional
separation of powers
has its own power in article III of the constitution
life tenure
only leave pthrough death, retirement or impeachment
protected salary
receive compensation which shall not diminish
appointment process
ensures justices are qualified enough
the judicial review process
-4/9 justices agree to hear the case
-documents are sent to the supreme court
-plaintiff, defence + amicus curiae briefs
-the plaintiff + defence are give 30 mins of oral arguments
-the supreme court will reach a majority verdict
the appointment process
-a vacancy occurs
-presidential nomination
-ABA rating
-senate judiciary committee
-full senate vote
judicial ideologies
-liberal justice = favours liberal values, eg, protecting rights
-conservative justice = favours conservative values, eg, national security
-swing justice = falls in the middle
strengths of the appointment process
-ensures independence
-ensures individuals are qualified
-role of elected branches gives some accountability
weaknesses of the appointment process
-politicised by the president
-politicised by the senate
-role of the media (can hinder a nominees chances)
why is judicial activism important in the court
-elected branches often shy away from controversial issues
-current problems need solutions now, but congress is slow
-without interpretation the constitution will become irrelevant
-the founding fathers couldn’t imagine 21st century problems
-ignoring issues could lead to breaches of the constitution
why is judicial restraint important in the court
-it is unelected and unaccountable
-no one knows what the founding fathers intended
-previous court decisions have already interpreted the constitution
-limited ways to check the court means they should act in a limited fashion
-activism undermines their independence
what does ‘living constitution’ argue
the constitution is a living document so it needs to be interpreted (loose constructionist)
what does ‘originalism’ argue
it should be interpreted more literally (strict constructionist)
