Scribd
Upload
26 views3 pages

Article III Notes

Article III of the United States Constitution summation for AP government

Uploaded by

Tostitos Doritos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views3 pages

Article III Notes

Article III of the United States Constitution summation for AP government

Uploaded by

Tostitos Doritos
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Article III

- Congress would decide what federal Courts we’d have, if any


- Framers thought most people would interact with state courts
Set up of The Branch:
- The test sets up the supreme court, but it doesn’t tell us anything about other courts
There are more questions for the court, as the federal law expands, there is more work for
the supreme court
- What does equal protection mean?
- Due Process
- Balance of free speech and intellectual property
- The founders might not have considered these Judicial Questions
- Hamilton said that the Judiciary would be the “least dangerous” branch, as they didn’t have the
power of the purse or sword
- They thought Congress would be the most dangerous because it had both of those powers
Supreme Court:
- Stare Decisis - “let the decision stand”
- Precedent - A previous action to be used as a guide or example
- Overturning Precedent: Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) -> Brown v. Board of Education
- Judicial Appointments -> Confirmation process (Senate) -> Life tenure
- Confirmation Process - The Senate confirms nominees to the Supreme Court by a
simple majority. When the Senate majority party opposes the President, there’s a greater
likelihood that the judicial appointments will be blocked or rejected
Judicial Review:
- Separate your Constitutional conclusions from your political conclusions
- Don’t ask if you like a policy; ask if it’s Constitutional
- This stops judges from being “policymakers in robes”
- They don’t implement their policy, only how certain cases apply to the Constitution
How has the Supreme Court of The United States (Scotus) Avoided Irrelevance?
- Andrew Jackson: “The Supreme Court has issued its opinion. Now let them enforce it”
- Said it because the Judicial Branch has no “power” to enforce their decisions, it is
primarily left to the “high up” branches, they simply offer their judgment
- American Culture has a strong norm towards following the law as declared by the Courts
- Effectiveness of a court a factor of American Culture and respect for rule of law
Judicial Review:
- Did the framers intend for the Judicial Branch to have the power to decide whether laws
are constitutional?
- General Consensus is that Courts would have that ability
- Hamilton wrote about Judicial Review in Federalist #78
- It isn’t the job of the Unelected Judges to Update and improve the Constitution
- It can be a challenge to decide what the original meaning was and whether that should be
updated for current events
- Hamilton says the Constitution represents the will of the people better than original laws
- The Deliberation Process of Ratification gives it the right to speak in we, the people’s
name
Checks Against the Court
- Congress can set up inferior courts
- Congress can change the number of SCOTUS judges
- Congress can impeach a justice
- Congress doesn’t have to fund, and limit the issues - its jurisdiction
- During the Civil War, Congress prevented SCOTUS from hearing national security cases
Marbury v. Madison
- Established the principle of Judicial Review, that the supreme court can review and
overturn laws if they’re unconstitutional
The Election of 1800: The first peaceful transfer of power between two central powers
- John Adams, a federalist, won
- The federalists controlled Congress and created some federal judgeships before Jefferson
took office
- John Adams Appointed Marbury to be a DC Justice of the peace
- But Secretary of State John Marshall didn’t get to deliver the judicial commission, so it
was up to Jefferson’s sec. of state, James Madison, to do it
- Jefferson Admin refuses to deliver the commission. Marbury sued
Personal Acrimony at play: Jefferson and Marshall are distant cousins who hated each other
Marbury’s Suit:
- He sues the executive branch directly in the supreme court
- The Question: Is this case within SCOTUS’S original jurisdiction?
Should Marbury Get his Commission or not?
- Marshall is thinking both as a lawyer and as a political strategist
- Jefferson’s admin will defy any order delivering the commission to Marbury
- A writ of mandamus: Like mandatory or mandate - it’s an order
- Could SCOTUS order the sec. of state to do something?

The original jurisdiction of the scotus did not include cases like Marbury v Madison
But
Congress passed a 1789 law telling scotus that it could hear these cases
Marshal said that statute conflicted with the Constitution, and when that happens, the
Constitution Wins

Judicial Review: Judges review the laws to make sure they comply with the Constitution
- An unconstitutional law cannot be enforced by scotus
- Marbury lost his case; The court didn’t have jurisdiction - the law giving it that
jurisdiction was found to be unconstitutional

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy