American Judiciary & Foundations of American Law
To view other note of American Government Click Here.
Overview
The United States has more lawyers per capita than any other country: two and a half times as many as Great Britain, five times as many as Germany, and twenty-five times as many as Japan. There’s even an entire television network devoted to covering trials (Court TV) and three versions of NBC’s popular show Law and Order.
Courts—and lawyers—have played crucial roles throughout American history. In the twentieth century, for example, court cases such as Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and Miranda v. Arizona (1966) have shaped the political landscape and caused tremendous controversy. In today’s political environment, we hear complaints from some who say that the courts are overstepping their bounds and undermining democracy, whereas others see the courts as the last protection against tyranny of the majority. The judicial branch of government is an integral, albeit complicated, part of American democracy.
The Foundations of American Law
There are three bases of American law:
- Case law: Court decisions that inform judicial rulings
- Constitutions: Agreements, such the U.S. Constitution and the state constitutions, that outline the structure of government
- Statutes: Laws made by governments
Case Law
The American legal system has its roots in the British system, which is based on common law. In this system, judges shape the law through their decisions, interpretations, and rulings, which are then collected into a body of law known as case law that other judges can use as reference. When judges make decisions, they look to similar cases for precedent, a court ruling from the past similar to the current case. The Latin phrase stare decisis denotes the legal doctrine of relying on precedent.
Example: The Fourth Amendment states that citizens are protected from “unreasonable searches and seizures” and that search warrants can only be issued based on “probable cause.” Many cases have laid down rules about how the courts should handle such matters. In the case Mapp v. Ohio (1961), the Supreme Court applied the exclusionary rule—which states that any evidence obtained through an illegal search is excluded from trial—to state courts. Since then, judges have referred to the precedent set in Mapp v. Ohio to keep illegally obtained evidence out of the courtroom.
Overturning Precedent
Judges rely on precedents when deciding their cases, but the Supreme Court also has the power to overturn precedents. Some of the most famous cases in American legal history have overturned precedents. For example, the civil rights case Brown v. Board of Education (1954), which outlawed segregation in public schools, overturned the 1896 case Plessy v. Ferguson. State and federal courts are reluctant to overturn precedent because the law needs to be stable for the courts to have legitimacy. It would be impossible for anyone to obey a law that kept changing. At the same time, judges recognize that the law must change to stay relevant. The courts need to strike a balance between stability and change.
Constitutions
The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land. No law or act of government—at the local, state, or federal level—can violate its principles. Similarly, a state’s constitution is the supreme law within the state’s borders, so long as the state constitution does not conflict with the national Constitution.
Marbury v. Madison
Federal courts have assumed the power of judicial review, the right to determine the constitutional legality of state and federal laws, congressional and presidential acts, and lower-court rulings. Likewise, each state court has assumed the power to determine the legality of legislative and gubernatorial decisions within its own borders.
The power of judicial review is not codified in the Constitution, however. Many state supreme courts had already assumed this power by the time the Constitution was ratified in 1789, and Chief Justice John Marshall set a precedent for federal judicial review in the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison. Federal courts use their power of judicial review sparingly, primarily because they have no means of enforcing their decisions. Nevertheless, judicial review is the most significant power of the judiciary branch.
Statutes
Statutes are laws passed by Congress and states legislatures. Congress passed an unprecedented number of statutes in the twentieth century, covering such issues as environmental regulation, criminal law, and contracts. State governments can also pass statues according to the rules of their own constitutions. Some government agencies can issue administrative regulations, which have the force of law.
Types of Law
American courts handle three types of law:
1. Criminal law: Forbids people from acting in certain ways. In criminal cases, a government prosecutor brings charges against a defendant. The outcome is either acquittal or punishment.
2. Civil law: Governs how people relate to one another. It can involve disputes about contracts, suits over responsibility for injury, and the like. Both parties in a civil suit are private citizens; the government does not bring civil charges against people.
3. Constitutional law: Covers the fundamentals of the political system, including cases that test the constitutionality of a law or government action.
There are three layers of authority in the federal court system:
- The Supreme Court is the highest federal court in the country.
- The twelve Courts of Appeals and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have moderate jurisdiction.
- Several district and specialized courts have the most restricted jurisdiction in the federal court system.
The Structure of the Federal Courts
The Supreme Court
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land. Sometimes it hears cases as a trial court, but most of the time the Court functions as an appellate court. The Court has traditionally consisted of nine justices: one chief justice and eight associate justices. Although Congress has the power to change the number of justices, the number has held steady at nine justices since 1869. Supreme Court justices serve for life.
Selecting Cases
The Supreme Court receives thousands of appeals every year but hears only a small percentage of them. The Court meets in closed session to decide which cases to hear. The Court generally follows the rule of four in choosing cases: If four justices want to hear a case, the Court will accept it. When the Court decides to hear a case, it issues a writ of certiorari, a legal document ordering a lower court to send a case to the Supreme Court for review. The writ of certiorari signals that the Supreme Court will hear the case. The Court tends to hear only cases of great importance, such as cases involving a constitutional matter or a possible overturning of precedent.
The Court is more likely to grant a writ of certiorari if one of the appellants is the U.S. government. The solicitor general, a high-ranking official in the Justice Department, submits the requests for certiorari and argues cases in front of the Court as the lawyer for the federal government.
Briefs and Oral Arguments
Both parties in a case must submit briefs to the Court, documents that present the party’s position and argument. Sometimes, other groups submit amicus curiae briefs (friend of the court briefs), which present further arguments in favor of one party or the other. The justices read the briefs and then may hear oral arguments, in which both parties have thirty minutes to make their case before the full Court. During oral arguments, the justices frequently interrupt the attorneys to ask questions.
Deciding Cases
After oral arguments, the justices meet in judicial conference to discuss the case. Sometimes the Court issues a per curiam rejection, an unsigned decision that reaffirms lower court’s ruling. This rejection means that the Supreme Court has decided not to hear the case. Only the justices and their clerks attend the conference, and the proceedings are kept secret. After debating the case, the justices vote. The Court then issues a decision, which states the Court’s ruling, and an opinion, which explains the Court’s legal reasoning behind its decision.
