The Judicial Branch. Qualifications What makes a good Supreme Court Justice? Look in Article III of the Constitution. What qualities does it list for.

The Judicial Branch

Qualifications• What makes a good Supreme Court Justice?

• Look in Article III of the Constitution. What qualities does it list for justices?

• In Article II, Section 2, Clause 2, the President is given the right to nominate federal judges with the “advice and consent” of the Senate. This means the closest thing to a qualification for a judge is that he/she must be able to be confirmed by the Senate.

Qualifications

•Why do you think the Founding Fathers did not put any qualifications for Supreme Court Justices in the Constitution?

What Makes a Good Supreme Court Justice?• In your table groups, designate one person to be the writer • Create a chart with four qualities: “essential” (a judge

must have this qualification),“desirable” (not required, but good to have), “undesirable” (no judge should have this quality), “unnecessary” (irrelevant or not needed)

• Using the qualities listed, put each quality into one of the four columns.

• MAKE SURE EVERYONE’S NAME IS ON THE CHART OR YOU WILL NOT GET CREDIT!

• After finishing filling in your chart, create a personal definition for what your group feels is a “qualified” justice

• You will be presenting your charts and qualities to the class.

What Makes a Good Supreme Court Justice?• Using the definitions from all the groups, let’s create a

class definition for a “qualified” justice.

• Judges in the Texas Courts are elected. • Judges in the state’s two highest courts (Texas Supreme

Court for civil cases and Texas Court of Criminal Appeals for criminal cases) must be U.S. citizens, at least 35 years old, and have been a lawyer for at least 10 years.

• Do you think the US Supreme Court should also have clear-cut qualifications? Why or why not?

• Do you think Supreme Court Justices should have to be elected? Why or why not?

Recommending a Justice• You are going to advise the President and recommend

a nominee to fill a vacancy in the U.S. Supreme Court• Each group will get a different Judicial Biography • Evaluate the backgrounds of your potential justices,

considering the qualities discussed before. • The differences in profiles are small, so you will have

to weigh factors such as colleges and law schools attended, legal careers outside the court system, gender, and ethnicity.

• Each group is to select one of the people profiled in their group and proceed to write justifications for their choice using Memo to the President.

Actual Identify of the Profiles• Chief Justice John Roberts• Justice John Paul Stevens• Justice Antonin Scalia• Justice Arthur Kennedy• Justice Clarence Thomas• Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg• Justice Stephen Breyer• Justice Samuel Alito, Jr.• Justice Sonia Sotomayor• Retired Justice Sandra Day O’Connor• Retired Justice David Souter

Vocabulary to Know• Jurisdiction: the power of a court to hear a case

• Original jurisdiction: a case begins in a court, being heard there for the first time

• Appellate jurisdiction: a court can hear a case on appeal from a lower court

• Concurrent jurisdiction: two or more courts have the right to hear the same kind of case

• Exclusive jurisdiction: a court is the only court to have the right to hear a case

• Civil case: no law is broken; a dispute over money, property, rights, family law; a lawsuit

Vocabulary to Know • Criminal case: a law is broken; someone is charged and

will be sentenced if convicted

• Felony: a criminal case where the punishment might include a prison sentence

• Misdemeanor: a criminal case where the punishment is by fine alone or time in jail

• Discretionary jurisdiction: a court is not required to hear a case, but may do so if it chooses

• Mandatory jurisdiction: a court is required to hear a case

Vocabulary to Know

•Probate case: a case dealing with wills or estates

•Juvenile: in Texas law, anyone age 16 and under at the time a crime is committed; if a serious crime is committed by a juvenile (murder, rape, armed robbery) a hearing can be held to certify the juvenile to stand trial as an adult.

Federal Courts vs State Courts

•Federal:▫Most of the Supreme Court’s

jurisdiction is on appeal. Occasionally one state may sue another and the Supreme Court will be the first (and only) court to hear the case. Such cases rarely occur.

Federal Courts Vs. State Courts• State:

▫ In civil cases, several courts (Justice of the Peace, County, and District) share jurisdiction in matters where the value in question is between $200 and $10,000. This is called concurrent jurisdiction.

▫ The District Courts do not hear any cases on appeal.

• Texas splits jurisdiction over civil and criminal matters at the highest court level: the Texas Supreme Court is the highest court for civil cases and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the highest court for criminal cases.

• If a case is lost in either of these courts and involves an issue under the U.S. Constitution, it can be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The U.S. Supreme Court can then decide whether or not it wants to hear the case, but it is not required to hear all of the cases that are appealed to it. On average, the Court hears only 1 to 2% of cases sent to it.

Discuss at Your Table Groups• The structure of both the federal and state

judicial branches determines jurisdiction and function.

• - How are federal and state judges selected?- What courts exist at the federal level and what kind of cases are heard in each court?- What courts exist at the state level and what kind of cases are heard in each court?

Hamilton Quote•Alexander Hamilton, writing in No. 78

of The Federalist Papers, described the Supreme Court as the “least dangerous” of the three branches of the federal government. Former Chief Justice William Rehnquist wrote, “It has most assuredly proved,” to be the “least understood of the three branches.”

•What do you feel this means?

Separation of Powers

•What are the 3 branches of the government?

•Why do we have the powers separate with a system of checks and balances?

•Why is this important?

Article III• Article III:

▫ Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior…

▫ Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority…

▫ In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction…

• The details of the judicial branch are left up to Congress and this led to a conflict between the branches early in our history.)

Marbury v. Madison

•When this case reached the Court for a decision, the Supreme Court had not had heard very many cases and was unsure of its exact power.

•The first Chief Justice, John Jay, managed to serve as ambassador to Great Britain at the same time.

Marbury v. Madison Decision• The words of John Marshall on the duty of the court

to say what the law means and gave the Supreme Court (and other federal courts) the power of judicial review, or the ability to examine actions of the other to branches to determine if they are allowed under the Constitution.

• He infers this power for the Court from its power to hear cases arising under the Constitution.

• When this case was over, the Supreme Court took its place as a co-equal branch of government.

The First Amendment•What rights are guaranteed by the First

Amendment?•Are these rights absolute or should there be

limits on them at times?▫Rights have to be balanced against other

rights. Examples might include falsely shouting “fire” in a crowded gymnasium; television cameras intruding on the decorum of a trial; people attempting to block traffic as part of a protest or having a noisy demonstration outside the windows of a school

Schenck v. United States

•This case involves alleged interference with the draft in World War I.

•Remember many in America viewed the struggle going on in Europe as Europe’s affair. The decision to enter the war was not universally supported.

•Espionage Act. ▫Is it a fair to place a limitation on protest

because of wartime conditions?

Judicial Philosophy• Judicial restraint: a belief that the courts

should defer to the actions of the legislative and executive branches except in cases where those actions are clearly unconstitutional

• Judicial activism: a belief that the courts are the best branch for defending individual rights and have an obligation to make decisions that set new rules when the legislative and executive branches have acted unfairly

Schenck v. US Decision• From this case came two schools of thought on

protections of the Bill of Rights

• An “absolute test,” that the Constitution means to tolerate no interference by government with the people's freedoms, “absolutely none,” citing the opening words of the First Amendment: Congress shall make NO law…”

• The “balancing test,” which suggests that the rights of the people to exercise their freedoms had to be “balanced” against “compelling public necessity.”

The First Amendment and Schools• Mary Beth and John Tinker, seen in the

second photo, wore their black armbands to school in Des Moines, Iowa, and were suspended for doing so. Their parents sued the Des Moines schools and the case went all the way to the Supreme Court.

• They are just one example of many cases involving the rights of students in public schools. The lesson today will focus on four First Amendment cases involving the rights of students.

The First Amendment and Schools•Each group will be assigned one of the

cases•You will become the “expert” on that case•You will present your cases to the class•Make sure to tell us:

▫Who▫When▫Where▫Why

District of Columbia, et al, v. Dick Anthony Heller•On a separate sheet of paper, write what

you would decide on this case if you were a Supreme Court Justice

•We will be comparing with the actual decision in a few minutes

Miranda Rights

•What do you think your Miranda Rights are?

5th Amendment• No person…shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a

witness against himself…

• At the time of Miranda’s case, there was confusion as to when this right applied. For certain it covered interrogations under oath (swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth…) such as testimony in court or before a grand jury, but whether someone had the right to remain silent at the police station was not clear.

• Protection against self-incrimination applies only to criminal cases. Someone brought to court in a civil case can be made to testify. OJ Simpson could not be forced to take the stand in his criminal murder trial in 1995, but in a later civil trial for wrongful death, he did have to testify.

6th Amendment• In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall have the right…to

have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

• Again, at the time of Miranda’s case, this right was known to apply to the courtroom, but whether it applied at the police station was unclear.

• At the time of Miranda’s confession, there was no set standard for explaining rights to a suspect.

• The warning of rights varied in law enforcement agencies around the country, and sometimes is varied from suspect to suspect within an agency. Since such a warning was not set, people did not hear their rights being read on television crime shows or in movies.

Group Work • You are going to be put into groups, with each group responsible for certain information:

• Facts group – Explain what happened in the case. Who was Miranda? What was his crime? What exactly was read to him at the time of his confession about his rights? What right was missing from this?

• Issue group – There are two constitutional amendments involved in this case, the Fifth Amendment and the Sixth Amendment. Formulate the constitutional issue for the case.

• Arguments for Miranda group – Give reasons why Miranda believed his rights had been violated when his confession was obtained

• Arguments for Arizona group – Give reasons why Arizona believed they had acted correctly in obtaining Miranda’s confession.

• Decision group – Explain what the Supreme Court decided in this case, covering the following points about the decision: What was the vote in the case? Could Arizona use Miranda’s confession against him? What changed about the application of the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination as a result of the decision? If a suspect decides he wants to answer police questions, who has the burden of proof that the suspect knew and understood his rights at the time of the confession? What rights must be read to suspects before interrogation as a result of this case?

Judicial Activism

•Do you think judicial activism is a good thing or a bad thing? Why?

Brown vs. Board of Education of Tokpeka•What is “separate but equal” mean?

•Plessy vs. Ferguson (1896)▫Laws requiring racial discrimination in

public places is acceptable as long as the facilities are “separate but equal”

Brown vs. Board

•1951 – class action suit against Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas▫Thirteen Topeka parents on the behalf of

their twenty children•Suit called for school district to reverse

its policy of racial segregation ▫1879 law permitted schools to maintain

separate elementary schools for black and white students

•Who was involved•What constitutional question was asked•Do you agree with the court’s decision?