Unit 3A study guide

Question 1

Jurisdiction

Answer 1

The authority/ right to hear and decide a case

Question 2

Original jurisdiction

Answer 2

The authority to be the first court to hear a case

Question 3

Appellate Jurisdiction

Answer 3

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

Question 4

Mandatory Jurisdiction

Answer 4

a court must hear every case filed with it

Question 5

Discretionary Jurisdiction

Answer 5

a court get to pick and choose which case it hears

Question 6

Basics of the Judicial Branch

Answer 6

Establishes, structures, and empowers the Supreme Court Congress given the power to create other, lower federal courts intended to be insulated from.

Question 7

Originalism

Answer 7

the Constitution should be interpreted as narrowly as possible. Also called original intent= what the Founders intended

Question 8

Living Constitutionalism

Answer 8

The constitution should be interpreted flexibly, especially when it involves a grey area, vagueness, or a “modern” question

Question 9

Judicial restraint

Answer 9

judges defer to elected branches, precedent whenever possible. Only strike things down when they clearly violate the constitution

Question 10

Judicial activism

Answer 10

judges more willing to strike down laws and set new presidents

Question 11

Checks on the judicial branch

Answer 11

president nominates justices, senate confirms them. Congress sets the size of the Supreme Court and establishes lower federal courts. Congress can write legislation that could modify the impact of a decision. Often the courts need the other branches to enforce their rulings

Question 12

Checks on the judicial branch: policy making

Answer 12

Sometimes, the courts can rule on controversial issues that the executive and legislative cannot speak on. They must consider separation of powers and the legitimacy of their branch, as well as that of the government overall.

Question 13

Judicial review

Answer 13

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

Question 14

Rule of Four

Answer 14

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

Question 15

Writ of certiorari

Answer 15

requests the records of the past case from the lower court

Question 16

Stare decisis:

Answer 16

legal term that means “to stand by things decided” or to apply precedent when faced with similar legal issues

Question 17

Precedent

Answer 17

a court decision that guides future cases that ask similar questions

Question 18

Supreme Court nominations

Answer 18

All federal judges appointed by President, approved by Senate via simple majority vote
-Federal judges serve for life-cannot be fired except for retirement, death, impeachment and removal
-nominees are the most likely to engender controversy

Question 19

Amicus curiae brief

Answer 19

a written document submitted as a “friend of the court” to provide additional information for justices to consider when reviewing a case

Question 20

Dual court system

Answer 20

the existence of two seperate court systems: the federal court and the state court. Each state has its own court system which handles cases understate law, while the federal court system handles cases under federal law.

Question 21

certiorari petition

Answer 21

a formal request for a higher court, typically supreme court, to review the decision of a lower court. When someone filed a petition, they are asking the Supreme court to consider their case and potentially overturn or modify the lower court’s ruling.

Question 22

majority opinion

Answer 22

the official statement of the courts decision, written by one of the justices who is part of the majority. The opinion explains the reasoning behind the courts ruling and sets a precedent for future cases

Question 23

dissenting opinion

Answer 23

written by one or more justices who disagree with the majority’s decision. This opinion outlines the reasons for their disagreement and presents an alternative interpretation of the law

Question 24

Concurring opinion

Answer 24

written by one or more justices who agree with the majority’s decision but for different reasons. This opinion provides an alternative or additional rational for the decision, which can offer further insights into the case and helps guide future interpretations of hte law

Question 25

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

Answer 25

Check congress: if a law passed by congress violates the constitution, the supreme court can declare it unconstitutional Check on executive branch: courts can curle that executive actions or orders are unconstitutional Check on state governments: if state laws or policies conflict with the constitution or federal law, courts can strike them down

Question 26

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

Answer 26

Fed 78: argues that life tenure or justices ensures independence form political pressure, making the judiciary the "least dangerous" branch because it lack enforcement power Brutus No. 15: criticizes life tenure, arguing that unelected justices with permanent positions are too powerful and can overrule the peoples will Debate: some argue life tenure ensures impartiality, while others worry it leads to unaccountable justices with excessive power

Question 27

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

Answer 27

originalists say it maintains legal consistency and prevents judicial activism. Non- originalists argue it allows laws to remain relevant in changing times

Question 28

What role do interest groups play in our judicial system?

Answer 28

-filing amicus curiae briefs to present arguments in important cases -lobbying for judicial appointments that align with their interests -funding litigation