The Judiciary Flashcards
What do loose constructionists believe about the Constitution?
They believe that there are powers and rights not explicitly mentioned in the document that the Founding Fathers would approve. The language is merely a starting point
What do strict constructionists believe about the Constitution?
They interpret it in a literal fashion, the language of the document is fixed, not evolving.
What is the power of judicial review?
SCOTUS has the power to declare a law as unconstitutional, or in conflict with a federal law
Why is the power of judicial review so important?
Constitutional amendments are very rare so rulings are likely to go unchallenged
In what ways can judicial review be seen to limit the power of SCOTUS?
It has to wait for cases to reach them via the lower courts
Litigants must be able to show they have suffered harm
Cases can take years to reach the court
Give an example of SCOTUS refusing to hear an appeal
Refused case on constitutionality of Vietnam War to avoid being seen as political
How is judicial independence maintained?
Separation of Powers is clearly defined in Constitution
Senate approval prevents appointment of anyone too close to President
Entrenched structure of the Court difficult to change
Name examples of justices who prove judicial independence
Sandra Day O’Connor
Anthony Kennedy
David Souter
John Roberts
Earl Warren
Name some cases that prove judicial independence
NFIB v Sebelius 2012
Dickerson v US 2000
Planned Parenthood v Casey 1992
Give 3 ways judicial appointments are significant
Power of judicial review
Lack of term limits
Significant to power and role of Presidents including influencing how people vote
Give a SCOTUS case concerning Habeus Corpus
Boumedienne v Bush 2008 - allows Guantanemo inmates to appeal
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 1st Amendment
Reno v ACLU 1997 - ruled against regulation of the internet
Wallace v Jaffree 1985 - ruled against state endorsement of prayer
Zelman v Simmons-Harris 2002 - allowed de facto gov’t support for religion
Texas v Johnson 1989, US v Eichmann 1990 - flag burning/desecration falls under free speech
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 2nd Amendment
McDonald v Chicago 2010 - states cannot infringe upon right to bear arms
DC v Heller 2008 - guarantees right to own arms for lawful purposes
Give a SCOTUS case concerning the 4th Amendment
Mapp v Ohio 1961 - gov’t can’t use evidence gathered unconstitutionally
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 5th Amendment
Miranda v Arizona 1966 - suspects in custody have to be read their rights
Dickerson v US 2000 - upheld Miranda rights
Give a SCOTUS case concerning the 6th Amendment
Gideon v Wainwright 1963 - affirmed the right to legal representation
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 8th Amendment
Miller v Alabama 2012 - life without parole is unconstitutional
Furman v Georgia 1972 - invalidated existing death penalty programs
Baze v Rees 2008 - lethal injection is constitutional
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 10th Amendment
Printz v US 1997 - certain provisions of Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act unconstitutional
NFIB v Sebelius 2012 - blocks some aspects of Obamacare
Give SCOTUS cases concerning the 14th Amendment
Brown v Board 1954 - outlawed segregation in public schools
Swanne v Charlotte Mecklenburg 1971 - aimed to speed up integration of public schools
What arguments are there against high judicial activity?
Laws should be made by elected legislature
Judges should abide the stare decisis principle
Should respect public opinion
Foreign policy should be left to national leaders
Judges are law experts not social policy experts
It is more difficult to hold judges to account
The Court loses credibility by advancing a particular political cause
An overly powerful SCOTUS threatens federalism
What arguments are there for an active judiciary?
Protect minority rights against tyranny of the majority (civil rights in South)
The court may make mistakes that need correcting (Plessy v Ferguson)
Risk-averse politicians may be unwilling to repeal archaic laws
Formal amendments are too difficult so the judiciary should use rulings to update the Constitution
Justices can prevent federal overreach (Obamacare)
What powers does SCOTUS have over states?
Can declare state law unconstitutional (e.g. US v Arizona 2012)
The Equal Protection Clause gave court ability to enforce state action to ensure equality
Moral authority
What powers does SCOTUS have over states?
Can declare state law unconstitutional (e.g. US v Arizona 2012)
The Equal Protection Clause gave court ability to enforce state action to ensure equality
Moral authority
What is the key power SCOTUS has over Congress?
Judicial review and the ability to strike down acts of Congress (e.g. NFIB v Sebelius)
What powers does SCOTUS have over the President?
Can rule presidential actions unconstitutional (e.g. NLRB v Noel Canning 2014)
Can strike President backed legislation down (e.g. NFIB v Sebelius 2012)
What is my conclusion on if there is an imperial judiciary?
Ability to overrule actions of other branches gives great power, however, the lack of material means of enforcement leaves it to rely on moral authority which is increasingly unreliable in a populist political climate
