The American Judiciary and Democracy
Initial Points

Authority/Power, Art III, Sec I
1 Supreme Court
"inferior courts" as congress may provide
Judges = appointed "on good behavior" "compensation shall not diminish"
Considered "weak" until Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Initial Points

Jurisdiction "original", "concurrent", "limited"

Federal Question (issues in law and equity arising under the constitution, laws, and Treaties of the U.S.
Admiralty
U.S. as a Party
Two or more States are Parties or Parties of two or more states.
Expansion of Structure and Power

Judiciary Act of 1789
Created a system of Federal Courts
Coexisted with the State Courts
But separate from State Courts
Power (1801 John Marshall)
appointed Chief Justice
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Created power of Judicial Review to declare acts of the coordinate (state legislatures, Fed Legislative & Executive) branches void if they violate the U.S. Const.
Judicial Review of Fed Law

Allows unelected branch of gov't to "Check" an elected branch.
Historically only about 160 Federal Law cases
But, use has increased recently
Safety:
Congress can "override"
The Court can "reverse"
Historically over 1200 state law cases
Fed Court Structure

Excellent discussion at US Court System: http://www2.maxwell.syr.edu/plegal/scales/court.html#ussc
A Hierarchy

Most litigation begins at State level b/c of Fed Limited Jurisdiction in civil and criminal cases.
After Judgment is rendered in the trial Court a Party may "appeal"
Judgments/Opinions

Trial courts issue jugdments (decision) based upon trial on the merits and evaluation of the facts presented.
(usually no or little opinion)

Appellate and Supreme courts issue judgment followed by opinion
Judgments and Opinions may become "policy"
Judgments, Opinions, and Policy become "precedent"
Opinions may be "unanamous", concurring, or split.
Dissenting Opinions may be important to future cases.
Precedent

Judicial ruling that gives influence in future/subsequent cases
following a precedent to make a decision is called "Stare decisis" = "let the decision stand".
The Supreme Court

Duty: to balance freedom, order and equality

Freedom and Order
key concept in (order) a peaceful society while enabling and protecting (freedom) vigorous political expression.
flag burning, rioting.
Freedom and Equality
key concept in (equality) educational opportunity and (freedom) choice of schools   
So... How does the Supreme Ct determine which cases to Hear?

Original Jurisdiction
(authority to hear before any other court does)
Art III, Sec 2:  "All cases affecting Ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which the state shall be a party".

Appellate Jurisdiction
(authority to hear cases tried, decided, or reexamined in other courts)
Conditions:
1. case must have reached the end of the state court system
2. case must raise a federal question (US Const, Laws or Treaties)
The Court Chooses its Agenda

Docket = the Court's agenda of cases
less than 100 cases per year of thousands of requests
Certiorari = written document asking the court "to become informed" of a lower court proceeding.
Rule of Four = four or more justices must agree a case warrants review.
Justices may oppose a review if they think the lower decision is satisfactory.

Role of U.S. Department of Justice in setting the Docket

U.S. Department of Justice Solicitor General
3rd highest ranking official in Dept of Justice
represents the government before the US Sup. Ct.
decides whether the Fed govt should appeal a lower decision
advocates the President's policies
advocates for groups/individual that is not a party to a legal action but is interested in the outcome.
Judical Restraint vs Judicial Activism

Justices may follow either philosophy
Restraint = judges adhere closely to statues and precedents in reaching a decision
Activism = judges interpret existing laws and precedents loosely and interject their own values in reaching a decision
Argument and Judgement

After Attorney's present and answer questions posed by the justices they "vote".

Justices in the majority draft an opinion consisting of reasons for their decision
Justices may be "unanamous" (all agree in reasoning) or "concurrent" (all agree in outcome but for different reasoning)

After convening to discuss the drafts the Chief Justice or senior justice in the majority writes the final opinion 
Source References:

Janda, Kenneth, Jeffrey Berry, and Jerry Goldman. 2009. The Challenge of Democracy.  Boston, MA: WadsworthCengage Learning.
Shea, Daniel, Joanne Green, and Christopher Smith.  2007.  Living Democracy.  Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Schmidt, Steffan, Mack Shelley, and Barabara Bardes.  2008.  American Government and Politics Today.  Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Miroff, Bruce, Raymond Seidelman, and Todd Swanstrom.  2007.  The Democratic Debate.  Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Gitelson, Alan, Robert L. Dudley, and Melvin Dubnick. 2008. American Government.  Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Dreslang, Dennis, James Gosling.  2008.  Politics and Policy in American States and Communities.  New York, NY: Pearson Longman.