Foundations of Judicial Power | US Court System: Organization and Jurisdiction | Appointment to the Federal Bench and The Court In Action | The Supreme Court As A National Policymaker | Outside Influences On The Court |
100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
200 | 200 | 200 | 200 | 200 |
400 | 400 | 400 | 400 | 400 |
800 | 800 | 800 | 800 | 800 |
1600 | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 | 1600 |
Final Question |
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/633ed/633ed6348144c7a6c05afe2c275d883e60bed257" alt="Edit Game"
As he put it in The Federalist, No. 78, the very purpose of constitutions is to place limitations on the powers of government, and it is only the Court that can ensure such limits in the United States. The Legislative branch, in particular, is unlikely to restrain itself without the helping hand of the judiciary.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a5cc/6a5cc150ae80f9a83f1d66751216170cfe9d7533" alt="View Answer"
As he put it in The Federalist, No. 78, the very purpose of constitutions is to place limitations on the powers of government, and it is only the Court that can ensure such limits in the United States. The Legislative branch, in particular, is unlikely to restrain itself without the helping hand of the judiciary.
Alexander Hamilton
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
This case established Judicial Reveiw.
Background on what caused this case:
Additional judicial positions were created by the Federalist Congress and filled
by the outgoing Federalist president (John Adams) in the final days of his
administration, after Thomas Jefferson and the Republicans gained control of
the presidency and the legislature; the apparent intention of these midnight
appointments was to ensure Federalist dominance of the judiciary.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a5cc/6a5cc150ae80f9a83f1d66751216170cfe9d7533" alt="View Answer"
This case established Judicial Reveiw.
Background on what caused this case:
Additional judicial positions were created by the Federalist Congress and filled
by the outgoing Federalist president (John Adams) in the final days of his
administration, after Thomas Jefferson and the Republicans gained control of
the presidency and the legislature; the apparent intention of these midnight
appointments was to ensure Federalist dominance of the judiciary.
Marbury vs Madison
The Court ruled that Marbury was entitled to his commission and that Madison
had broken the law in failing to deliver it, but that the Court could not compel
Madison to comply with the law; the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789,
which granted the Court the power to issue writs of mandamus in such cases,
was itself unconstitutional because it sought to expand the original
jurisdiction (jurisdiction of the first court to hear a case) as defined in Article III.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
There how many of these courts?
1) US Federal District Courts
2) US Courts of Appeals
3) US Supreme Court
1) US Federal District Courts - 94
2) US Courts of Appeals - 13
3) US Supreme Court - 1
These are all called Constitutional Courts because they were created by Congress under Article III, which discusses the judicial branch.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
This map shows the 12 geographic circuit courts. Which one of the courts does the map represent?
The US Courts of Appeal.
The US Courts of Appeals Circuit Courts are the thirteen intermediate appellate courts immediately below the US Supreme Court. Twelve of the Circuit Courts hear cases on appeal from US District Courts (trial) within their territorial jurisdiction; the thirteenth court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, has national subject-matter jurisdiction over cases initially held in the US Court of Claims, as well as appeals of patent, copyright, and a few other classes of cases.
- US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
- US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
True or False: The constitution establishes strict qualifications or criteria for judicial branch. All have to be lawyers for atleast 5 years.
False - The Constitution does not establish any qualifications or criteria for the judicial
branch; by custom, they must be lawyers.
Almost one-half of all Supreme Court justices during this century have had no
prior experience as judges (including some of the most prominent and influential
justices, such as John Marshall, Louis Brandeis, Harlan Stone, Charles Evans
Hughes, Felix Frankfurter, Earl Warren, and William Rehnquist).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
The most important tool that the Court has for controlling its agenda is the power
to grant—or not to grant, an order from an appellate court to lower courts demanding that they send up a complete record of the case.
a writ of certiorari (‘cert’)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/audio.php?file=certio02&word=certiorari&text=%5C%CB%8Cs%C9%99r-sh(%C4%93-)%C9%99-%CB%88rer-%C4%93%2C%20-%CB%88r%C3%A4r-%C4%93%2C%20-%CB%88ra-r%C4%93%5C
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
1) This is a statement of the legal reasoning that supports the decision of
the Court.
2) By tradition,who assigns the majority opinion if he voted with the majority in conference (and sometimes assigns it to himself); if this person votes with the minority
(dissenters), the senior member of the majority assigns the opinion (this is one
of the norms referred to above).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a5cc/6a5cc150ae80f9a83f1d66751216170cfe9d7533" alt="View Answer"
1) This is a statement of the legal reasoning that supports the decision of
the Court.
2) By tradition,who assigns the majority opinion if he voted with the majority in conference (and sometimes assigns it to himself); if this person votes with the minority
(dissenters), the senior member of the majority assigns the opinion (this is one
of the norms referred to above).
1) Written Opinion
2) Chief Justice
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
There are two main views that dicatate the courts with regards to the US Constitution. Some beleive the court must be guided by the orginal intentions of the framers and the words in the Constitution while there are others that believe the intentions of the Founders are impossible to determine and would be unreasonably constricting in the twentieth century; they beleive that jurits must try to reconcile the fundamental principles of the Constituion with changing conditions.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a5cc/6a5cc150ae80f9a83f1d66751216170cfe9d7533" alt="View Answer"
There are two main views that dicatate the courts with regards to the US Constitution. Some beleive the court must be guided by the orginal intentions of the framers and the words in the Constitution while there are others that believe the intentions of the Founders are impossible to determine and would be unreasonably constricting in the twentieth century; they beleive that jurits must try to reconcile the fundamental principles of the Constituion with changing conditions.
Loose Construction and Original Intention (Strict Construction).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
In what case did the court rule in-favor of President Franklin D. Roosevelt to Executive Order 9066 during World War II which authorized the relocation or internment of Japanese Americans.
Korematsu vs United States (1944)
In a 6-3 decision, the Court sided with the government, ruling that the exclusion order was constitutional. Six of eight Roosevelt appointees sided with Roosevelt. The lone Republican appointee, Owen Roberts, dissented.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt=""
1) This Supreme Court case stated that if a federal and state law are in conflict, the federal law is supreme.
It created the Supremacy Clause.
2) This Supreme Court case determined that in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. This overruled the segregation that was mainly in the Southern US.
3) This Supreme Court case determined that defendants in criminal cases have an absolute right to counsel.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/6a5cc/6a5cc150ae80f9a83f1d66751216170cfe9d7533" alt="View Answer"
1) This Supreme Court case stated that if a federal and state law are in conflict, the federal law is supreme.
It created the Supremacy Clause.
2) This Supreme Court case determined that in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. This overruled the segregation that was mainly in the Southern US.
3) This Supreme Court case determined that defendants in criminal cases have an absolute right to counsel.
1) Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824
Congress and New York had both passed laws regulating the steamboat industry. Gibbons had a federal permit for a steamboat business; Ogden had a state permit for the same waters. Siding with Gibbons, the Court said that, in matters of interstate commerce, the “Supremacy Clause” tilts the balance of power in favor of federal legislation.
2) Brown v. Board of Education, 1954
This unanimous decision marked the beginning of the end for the “Separate But Equal” era that started with Plessy, and the start of a new period of American race relations. With Brown, desegregation of public schools began—as did resistance to it. Ten contentious years later, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 made racial equality a matter of federal law.
3) Gideon v. Wainwright, 1963
Too poor to afford a lawyer, Clarence Earl Gideon was convicted for breaking into a poolroom—a felony crime in Florida. He appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled that the government must provide free counsel to accused criminals who cannot pay for it themselves. At first, the ruling applied to felonies only. It was later extended to cover any cases where the penalty was six months imprisonment or longer.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/08100/08100fb076abfef145bf4594e758f6ae0f83ecfb" alt="Scoreboard"
What Would You Like To Risk?
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8510d/8510d0d55fd5ad1ae7ae4d62e5dfcf9cbfa8ac6c" alt="Scoreboard"
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
Review Game Info:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e6f9a/e6f9aa2fc86d766ea63c55d9b4151ca407b1ae87" alt="Alert"
You must save this address to be able to find and share your game!