Exam 2: Jurisdiction and Organization of the Federal Courts
What is the significance at the Supreme Court of what is informally called "the rule of four"?
The "rule of four" is an informal guideline used by the justices of the United States Supreme Court to decide whether the Court will grant a writ of certiorari, which is a request to review a lower court's judgment. The significance of this rule lies in its function as a threshold for the Supreme Court to determine which cases it will hear.
According to the rule of four, if at least four of the nine Supreme Court justices agree that a case has sufficient merit to warrant the Court's review, a certiorari will be granted. This does not mean that the justices who vote to hear the case believe that the lower court's decision should be overturned; rather, it indicates that they believe the legal issues presented by the case are significant enough to require the Supreme Court's attention.
The rule of four serves several important purposes:
1. **Democratic Principle**: It prevents a majority of the Court from controlling its docket, thus ensuring that a minority of justices can have a significant impact on the cases the Court chooses to hear.
2. **Legal Significance**: It helps to ensure that the Court hears cases that raise important legal questions that may affect the nation as a whole, or that address inconsistencies in the interpretation of federal law or the U.S. Constitution.
3. **Judicial Efficiency**: It allows the Court to manage its caseload by hearing only those cases that at least some of the justices consider being of great importance, rather than every case appealed to it.
4. **Checks and Balances**: It provides a mechanism for the judicial branch to check and balance the other branches of government by potentially reviewing and ruling on the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
The rule of four is not a formal law or constitutional requirement but rather a court-made tradition that has been followed for many years. It reflects the Court's commitment to collegiality and minority rights within the judicial process, ensuring that the Court's docket is not solely determined by the majority's interests.
What is the role of amici curiae in the work of the Supreme Court?
Amici curiae, which is Latin for "friends of the court," play a significant role in the work of the Supreme Court of the United States. These are individuals or organizations that are not parties to a case but have a strong interest in the matter and seek to provide the Court with relevant information, expertise, or insights that may assist in the decision-making process.
The primary role of amici curiae in the Supreme Court is to submit amicus briefs. These briefs are legal documents that offer arguments, perspectives, or data that the parties to the case may not have presented but that could be valuable to the Court's understanding of the issues at hand. Amicus briefs can support one party's position, argue against both parties, or suggest a different line of reasoning altogether.
Amici curiae can be a diverse group, including non-profit organizations, advocacy groups, trade associations, companies, government entities, legal scholars, and other interested parties. Their involvement is particularly common in cases that have broad legal, social, or economic implications.
The role of amici curiae in the Supreme Court includes:
1. Providing Expertise: They often bring specialized knowledge or expertise to the Court's attention that the justices may not possess, such as technical data, historical context, or the potential impact of a decision on a particular industry or group.
2. Highlighting Broader Implications: Amici can underscore the wider consequences of a potential ruling, showing how it might affect other laws, legal principles, or groups not directly involved in the case.
3. Offering Legal Arguments: They can present legal arguments or interpretations of the law that the parties in the case might not have fully explored, which can be particularly useful in complex or novel legal issues.
4. Influencing Public Policy: By articulating the interests of various segments of society, amici curiae can indirectly influence public policy through the Court's rulings.
5. Supporting the Court's Legitimacy: By providing the Court with comprehensive information and diverse viewpoints, amici curiae help ensure that the justices make well-informed decisions, which can enhance the legitimacy of the Court's rulings in the eyes of the public.
While amici curiae can provide valuable assistance to the Court, it is important to note that the justices are under no obligation to follow or even consider the arguments presented in amicus briefs. The influence of amici curiae varies from case to case, and ultimately, the decision rests with the justices based on the merits of the arguments presented by the actual parties to the case and the law.
The fundamental threshold question that must be addressed in any lawsuit is that of _____.
D
Congress has specified that certain cases in the U. S. District Courts be heard and decided by a panel of three judges instead of the usual single judge sitting alone. What is the special option available to the losing party in a decision by such a three-judge panel that is not available to the losing party in the great bulk of district court cases that are routinely decided by a single judge?
Which of the following is not usually included within the list of Ashwander Rules?
What are the Ashwander rules? Do they expand or contract judicial power? Explain.
What do the data about the Supreme Court's caseload suggest about the importance of state and lower federal courts in helping to shape American constitutional law?
An appeal from a decision by a U.S. District Court in California is typically heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the _____.
What is the role of the Solicitor General of the United States in the work of the Supreme Court?
A case is considered _____ if the issues that gave rise to it have been resolved or otherwise disappeared.
An appeal in a patent case from a U.S. district court in New Jersey will typically be heard by the U. S. Court of Appeals for the _____.
After determining that a real case or controversy exists, a federal court must ascertain whether the party initiating the litigation has _____.
Article III of the Constitution provides that the Supreme Court ". . . shall have _____ Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the _____ shall make."
Which of the following is usually included within the list of Ashwander Rules?
An appeal from a ruling by the Court of Appeals of Veterans Claims is typically heard by _____.
Article II enumerates specific powers granted to the president. These include the authority to _____.
What are the principal steps in the process by which the Supreme Court decides cases?
Search warrants in the federal court system are ordinarily issued by _____.
How can "threshold questions" such as standing be crucial in the outcome of a constitutional case?
Filters
- Essay(0)
- Multiple Choice(0)
- Short Answer(0)
- True False(0)
- Matching(0)