The History of Supreme Court

Document Sample
The History of Supreme Court Powered By Docstoc
					  The History of
The Supreme Court
             Federalist 78
     Alexander Hamilton
   Addressed the necessity
      of an independent

        See handout…
The Appointment Process

 Appointed for life during good
   Appointed by the President

 Subject to Senatorial consent.
             In The Beginning…

   Judiciary Act of 1789
       Established the three tiered dual court system.
       Set the size of the Supreme Court at six.
       Section 25: Gave Supreme Court appellate
        jurisdiction over federal questions arising in
        state supreme courts.
       Granted Supreme Court with original
        jurisdiction over issuing writs of mandamus.

           Appeals Process
Federal     Federal
District    Appeals
 Court       Court

Step One    Step Two

                                Step Three:              Supreme
                          Case is appealed to the       Court rules
                               Supreme Court.           on the case.

                           The Court will either:       Step Four
                        1. Affirm lower-court ruling
                       2. Remand case back to lower
                           court for reconsideration.
                          3. Agree to put case on
 Supreme Court Procedure

Read Justice Brennan’s How the Supreme Court Arrives at Decisions
      Court Players and Opinions
   Petitioner: Party appealing lower court’s decision
   Respondent: Party defending lower court’s decision

   Majority opinion - Court’s decision on a case and sets out
   Concurring Opinion - is in agreement with the majority
    opinion but is written to add or emphasize a point.
   Dissenting Opinions - Written by justices who do not agree
    with the Court’s decision.

   Precedents: Standards set by the Court’s decisions to be
    used in interpreting future cases.
     Two Problems Facing the First
          American Judiciary
1.   Separation of Powers: Defining judicial power
     of the federal courts vis-à-vis the other
          Would not play advisory role to political branches.
          Would decide legal questions not political ones.
2.   Federalism: Defining judicial power of the
     federal courts vis-à-vis the states.
          Amendment 10 vs. Article VI
           The Two Marshall Courts
1.   1801-1824: Expansion of court’s power through
     constitutional interpretation.
          Marbury v. Madison = Judicial Review
          McCulloch v. Maryland = Bank of the United States
                The Power to tax is the power to destroy!
          Gibbons v. Ogden = Competition, not monopoly, will secure
           economic advancement.
                Capitalism wins!

2.   1824-1835: The retreat.
          The Cherokee Cases and Andrew Jackson
          Contracts Clause: bending to state will
                    A Comparison
   What are the five similarities of the Marshall
    and Taney Courts:
      1.   Limited government secured individual liberties
      2.   Necessity of effective authority within state and
           federal government
      3.   Interpreted the law to benefit capitalism
      4.   Refused to disrupt social order
      5.   Expanded federal power
                  Taney’s Legacy

   Dred Scott v. Sanford
       Remember, Taney was a
       Ruled against Scott
             Decision stood on interstate
              regulation grounds.
        Reconstruction and the Court
   Reconstruction Amendments: 13th, 14th, 15th
       National laws prohibiting states from depriving citizens of basic rights.

   Slaughterhouse Cases
       How did these cases throw the 14th amendment equal protection clause for
        a loop?
            Louisiana butchers contested state health codes as depriving right to
             freely practice their occupations.
            The court found that the 14th amendment barred states from depriving
             only those “privileges and immunities” that Americans possessed as
             United States citizens as distinct from those they held as state citizens.

   Racism in the Court
       1898 – The Court created “Separate But Equal Doctrine,” in Plessy v.
       Does this jive with the 14th Amendment’s equal protection clause
            The Progressive Era
Industrial Growth + Technological Advancement
              = Global Marketplace

      Major Issues Addressed by the Court in the
                    Progressive Era:
                1.   Laissez-faire constitutionalism
 2.   Supported Dual Federalism: states given extraordinary
                 leeway in regulating business.
                         3.   Liberty of Contract
                       See Lochner v. New York…
          The Progressive Era

    Liberty of Contract: Article I, Section 10, Clause 1
                 Lochner v. New York
    Lochner = bakery owner
    New York statute limiting hours bakers could
    S. Ct. found statute in violation of 14th amendment
     securing residents rights to enter into contracts free
     from governmental regulation.
    Affirmed laissez-faire doctrine and capitalism.
The Taft Court: The Roaring 20’s

   Pro-Business/Anti-Labor decisions
         Liberty of Contract v. Police Power of States
               1923 - Adkins v. Children’s Hospital: Court struck down
                a minimum wage law for women.
                    In light of the 19th Amendment, women were no
                     longer in need of price fixing.

         What is police power?
               Obligation of state government to provide for the
                general welfare of all residents.
The Taft Court: The Roaring 20’s

   Civil Liberties Prevail
         Incorporation Argument: Bill of Rights
          guarantees should be extended to protect
          citizens from the states – see handout.
         Nationalization of state criminal law
               Powell v. Alabama (Scottsboro cases)
                   Majority declared that the 14th amendment’s
                    DP clause required fair trials for state criminal
     The Crash, The New Deal and
   Chief Justice Charles E. Hughes - 1930
         Pro-business attitude collapses with the Market.
         By 1937, FDR had filled the bench with liberals.
         New Deal legislation was routinely upheld.
         Protecting civil liberties takes a front seat.
   Chief Justice Harlan F. Stone - 1941
         Korematsu v. United States: argued under war
          powers of the president.
The Vinson Court: The Cold War
         Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson - 1946
   Judicial restraint abandoned freedom of thought,
    association, and expression
        Dennis v. United States - 1951
            Clear and Present Danger Test created to reason conviction of
             McCarthyism victims.

   Separation of Powers Dilemma
        Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer - 1952
            Court overruled Truman’s seizure of nation’s steel mills to avoid an
             impending steelworker strike on the eve of the Korean conflict.

   Further extended Incorporation
       The Warren Court:
    The Civil Rights Movement

   Chief Justice Earl Warren – 1953
         Brown v. Board of Education decision
               Overturned Plessy v. Ferguson
               Fulfilled “cold war imperative”
         Major facilitator of nationalizing criminal
          procedure – see handout
         Group Rights over Individual Rights
                   After Warren
   Warren Burger – 1969
         Delivered majority opinion in Nixon v. U.S. forcing the president
          to hand over the “tapes”.
         Advocate of judicial restraint
         Conservative reformer
   William Rehnquist – 1986
         As a law clerk to Justice Jackson, Rehnquist suggested the Court
          uphold Plessy in the Brown case.
         His record shows support for law enforcement, strict
          incorporation, states-centered federalism.
The Roberts Court

    What will be his legacy?

        Read Time article