The US supreme court
0.0 / 5
- Created by: am3l1a467
- Created on: 13-04-23 17:21
How many justices does the court consist of
9 justices- 1 chief and 8 associate justices
1 of 100
Who are the justices nominated by
the president
2 of 100
how does there appointment get confirmed
a simple majority of the senate
3 of 100
how lonmg are justices appointed for and how do they leave service
for life
by voluntary resignation or dying or they can be impeached
by voluntary resignation or dying or they can be impeached
4 of 100
what are the 2 main strands of judicail philosophy
strict constructionists (originalists)
loose constructionsits/ living constitution
loose constructionsits/ living constitution
5 of 100
what do strict constructionists tend to do
-interpret the Constitution in a strict, literal fashion + favour state government rights over
-interpret the Constitution in a strict, literal fashion
-favour state government rights over federal government power
-lead to an outcome that is ofte
-interpret the Constitution in a strict, literal fashion
-favour state government rights over federal government power
-lead to an outcome that is ofte
6 of 100
what do strict constructionists tend to do
-try to interpret the Constitution in line with its Original meaning and intent (hence 'originalists*)
-be appointed by Republican presidents (e.g. John Roberts, strict constructionist; Antonin Scalia, originalist)
-be appointed by Republican presidents (e.g. John Roberts, strict constructionist; Antonin Scalia, originalist)
7 of 100
what do loose constructionists tend to do
-interpret the Constitution in a loose fashion favour federal government power over state government rights
-read elements into the document that they think the framers would have approved of
-read elements into the document that they think the framers would have approved of
8 of 100
what do loose constructionists tend to do
-see the Constitution as a living, dynamic document, which should be adapted to take account of the views of contemporary society (hence 'living Constitution')
-be seen as liberal justices
-be appointed by Democratic presidents (e.g. Sonia Sotomayor, E
-be seen as liberal justices
-be appointed by Democratic presidents (e.g. Sonia Sotomayor, E
9 of 100
examples of loose constructionists
Stephen Breyer (Clinton)
Sonia Sotomayor (Obama)
Elena Kagan (Obama)
Sonia Sotomayor (Obama)
Elena Kagan (Obama)
10 of 100
examples of strict constructionists
John Roberts (George W. Bush) (swing justice?)
Clarence Thomas (George H.W. Bush)
Samuel Alito (George W. Bush)
Neil Gorsuch (Trump)
Brett Kavanaugh (Trump)
Amy Coney Barrett (Trump)
Clarence Thomas (George H.W. Bush)
Samuel Alito (George W. Bush)
Neil Gorsuch (Trump)
Brett Kavanaugh (Trump)
Amy Coney Barrett (Trump)
11 of 100
what high profile cases did justice anthony kennedy play the role of a swing justices
Bostock v Clayton County, Georgia (2020) on LGBTQ+ rights
zDepartment of Homeland Security v University of California (2020) on DACA beneficiaries
June Medical Services v Russo (2020) on abortion rights.
zDepartment of Homeland Security v University of California (2020) on DACA beneficiaries
June Medical Services v Russo (2020) on abortion rights.
12 of 100
what is the 5 stage process of appointment
1. A vacancy occurs
2. The president instigates a search for possible nominees and interviews shortlisted candidates
3. The president announces their nominee
2. The president instigates a search for possible nominees and interviews shortlisted candidates
3. The president announces their nominee
13 of 100
what is the 5 stage process of appointment
4. The Senate Judiciary Committee holds confirmation hearings on the nominee and makes a recommendatory vote
5. The nomination is debated and voted on in the full Senate. A simple majority vote is required for confirmation
5. The nomination is debated and voted on in the full Senate. A simple majority vote is required for confirmation
14 of 100
what factors affect the president's choice of nominee
-shares a similar judicial philosophy to the president
-is quite young - meaning they are likely to remain on the Court for longer
- is likely to be acceptable to a majority of the Senate (especially important if the president's party is in the minorit
-is quite young - meaning they are likely to remain on the Court for longer
- is likely to be acceptable to a majority of the Senate (especially important if the president's party is in the minorit
15 of 100
what factors affect the president's choice of nominee
-has an uncontroversial background - from both a judicial and a personal point of view
-is going to be highly rated professionally (by the American Bar Association)
-has relevant experience
-is going to be highly rated professionally (by the American Bar Association)
-has relevant experience
16 of 100
how has the confirmation process has changed over recent years- what did it used to be
Supreme Court nominees used to be approved mostly by overwhelming, bipartisan votes (e.g. Anthony Kennedy, 97-0 in 1988).
17 of 100
how has the confirmation process has changed over recent years- what is it now
Nowadays, although rejections are still rare, confirmation votes are much more likely to be along party lines, with pretty much all the senators from the president's party voting 'yes' and those from the other party voting 'no' (e.g. Brett Kavanaugh, 50-4
18 of 100
what are the significant criticisms of the appointment and confirmation process
-Presidents have tended to politicise the nominations by attempting to choose justices who share their political views and judicial philosophy (e.g.Obama with Kagan; Trump with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Coney Barrett).
-The Senate has tended to politicise t
-The Senate has tended to politicise t
19 of 100
what are the significant criticisms of the appointment and confirmation process
-Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee from the president's party tend to ask soft questions of the nominee.
-Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee from the opposition party attempt, through their questions, to attack or embarrass the nominee rat
-Members of the Senate Judiciary Committee from the opposition party attempt, through their questions, to attack or embarrass the nominee rat
20 of 100
what are the significant criticisms of the appointment and confirmation process
-Justices are now frequently confirmed on party-line votes (e.g. Kavanaugh).
- The media conduct a 'feeding frenzy' often connected with matters of trivia.
- The media conduct a 'feeding frenzy' often connected with matters of trivia.
21 of 100
why is it said that these are the most important nominations a president
makes
makes
- they occur infrequently
- they are for life
- just one new appointee to a nine-member body can significantly change its philosophical balance
- the Supreme Court has the power of judicial review
- their decisions will profoundly affect the lives of ord
- they are for life
- just one new appointee to a nine-member body can significantly change its philosophical balance
- the Supreme Court has the power of judicial review
- their decisions will profoundly affect the lives of ord
22 of 100
how was judicial review founded
-It was 'found' by the Court in Marbury v Madison (1803) - regarding a federal law.
-It was used again in Fletcher v Peck (1810) - regarding a state law.
-It was used again in Fletcher v Peck (1810) - regarding a state law.
23 of 100
why is the Court politically important
because it rules on key political issues such as the rights of minority ethnic groups, capital punishment, gun control and freedom of speech.
24 of 100
how does this turn the court into a quasi-legislative body
an example
an example
because the effects of its decisions have almost the effect of a law having been passed by Congress
roe vs wade
roe vs wade
25 of 100
whats it called if the courts unelected and largely unaccountabiole overturn the actions of these directly elected officials
judicial activism
26 of 100
what is it called if the courts tend to defer to the actions and decisions of elected officials-Congress and the president
judicial restraint
27 of 100
key traits of judicial activism
-An activist Court is one that sees itself as leading the way in the reform of
US society
-It sees itself as an equal partner with the legislative and executive branches in shaping society and acting as a safeguard of civil rights and liberties
US society
-It sees itself as an equal partner with the legislative and executive branches in shaping society and acting as a safeguard of civil rights and liberties
28 of 100
key traits of judicial activism
-It is not inclined to be deferential to Congress or to the president
-It often uses its power of judicial review to strike down Acts or actions of elected officials
-But the term can be used with overtones of disapproval by critics of such a court
-It often uses its power of judicial review to strike down Acts or actions of elected officials
-But the term can be used with overtones of disapproval by critics of such a court
29 of 100
In some cases what can judicial activism be labelled as
'legislating from the bench' by an 'imperial judiciary'
30 of 100
Examples of recent cases in which the Supreme Court has clearly taken the lead in shaping US society in terms of its rights and liberties
Roe v Wade (1973) - guaranteed a woman's right to choose an abortion
District of Columbia v Heller (2008) - guaranteed individual gun ownership rights
Obergefell v Hodges (2015) - guaranteed rights to same-sex marriage
District of Columbia v Heller (2008) - guaranteed individual gun ownership rights
Obergefell v Hodges (2015) - guaranteed rights to same-sex marriage
31 of 100
where can judicial activism could also be seen
In the case of Bush v Gore (2000), which effectively awarded the presidency to George W. Bush after a disputed vote count in Florida
32 of 100
what is a restrained court
one that is more inclined to accept the actions and
decisions of elected officials
decisions of elected officials
33 of 100
what does it see Congress and the president as
the shapers of US society.
34 of 100
what could be a more accurate terms
judicial deference
35 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of religion
why is it significant
Zelman v Simmons-Harris (2002): the Court upheld an Ohio state programme giving financial aid to parents, allowing them, if they so choose, to send their children to a religious or private schoo
why is it significant
Zelman v Simmons-Harris (2002): the Court upheld an Ohio state programme giving financial aid to parents, allowing them, if they so choose, to send their children to a religious or private schoo
Significance: acknowledged that state government money could be used to pay for children attending religious, private schools.
36 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of religion
why is it significant
Town of Greece v Galloway (2014): the Court allowed legislative bodies (such as town councils) to begin their meetings with prayer.
why is it significant
Town of Greece v Galloway (2014): the Court allowed legislative bodies (such as town councils) to begin their meetings with prayer.
Significance: strengthened individuals rights to practise their religion in
public, even in state-constituted and state-funded bodies.
public, even in state-constituted and state-funded bodies.
37 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of religion
why is it significant- Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. (2010): the Court overturned the requirement under the Affordable Care Act (2010) (otherwise known as Obamacare) that family-owned firms had to pay for health in
why is it significant- Burwell v Hobby Lobby Stores Inc. (2010): the Court overturned the requirement under the Affordable Care Act (2010) (otherwise known as Obamacare) that family-owned firms had to pay for health in
Significance: strengthened individual rights of Christian business executives to run their companies along lines that agreed with their religious beliefs.
38 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of speech
why is it significant
McConnell v Federal Election Commission (2004): upheld federal law (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) banning soft money in election campaigns, stating that this ban did not violate freedom of speec
why is it significant
McConnell v Federal Election Commission (2004): upheld federal law (Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act) banning soft money in election campaigns, stating that this ban did not violate freedom of speec
Significance: limiting campaign finance is not incompatible with the
freedom of speech provision of the Constitution
freedom of speech provision of the Constitution
39 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of speech
why is it significant
Citizens United v FEC (2010): ruled that when it comes to rights of political speech, business corporations and labour unions have the same rights as individuals.
why is it significant
Citizens United v FEC (2010): ruled that when it comes to rights of political speech, business corporations and labour unions have the same rights as individuals.
Significance: opened the door to unlimited spending by corporations in
election campaigns, mostly funnelled through political action committees (PACs)
election campaigns, mostly funnelled through political action committees (PACs)
40 of 100
First Amendment- freedom of speech
why is it significant
McCutcheon v FEC (2014): struck down a 1970s limit on totals that wealthy individuals can contribute to candidates and PACs.
why is it significant
McCutcheon v FEC (2014): struck down a 1970s limit on totals that wealthy individuals can contribute to candidates and PACs.
Significance: reaffirmed giving of money to candidates and PACs as a
fundamental right
fundamental right
41 of 100
second Amendment- gun control
why is it significant
District of Columbia v Heller (2008): guaranteed individual gun ownership rights.
McDonald v City of Chicago (2010): extended the rights announced in Heller to state and local governments
why is it significant
District of Columbia v Heller (2008): guaranteed individual gun ownership rights.
McDonald v City of Chicago (2010): extended the rights announced in Heller to state and local governments
Significance: never before had the courts ruled this interpretation of the
Second Amendment
Second Amendment
42 of 100
Eighth Amendment: death penalty
why is it significant
Roper v Simmons (2005): declared it to be unconstitutional to sentence anyone to death for a crime they committed when under the age of 18.
Glossip v Gross (2015): declared that lethal injection did
why is it significant
Roper v Simmons (2005): declared it to be unconstitutional to sentence anyone to death for a crime they committed when under the age of 18.
Glossip v Gross (2015): declared that lethal injection did
Significance: the Court was clearly seen as telling us what eighteenth-century words mean in the twenty-first-century USA
43 of 100
as well as interpreting the Bill of Rights, what else does the supreme court make decisions on
decides cases affecting matters of public policy that are at the forefront of US political debate.
Abortion
Abortion
44 of 100
why was it significant
Roe v Wade (1973): ruled that the state law of Texas forbidding abortion was
unconstitutional.
Roe v Wade (1973): ruled that the state law of Texas forbidding abortion was
unconstitutional.
Significance: guaranteed a woman's right to choose an abortion as a constitutionally protected right
45 of 100
why was it significant
Gonzales v Carhart (2007): upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Act (2003), which banned late-term abortions
Gonzales v Carhart (2007): upheld the Partial Birth Abortion Act (2003), which banned late-term abortions
Significance: established that a woman's right to choose an abortion could be legally limited
46 of 100
why was it significant
Whole Woman's Health v Hellersted (2016): struck down as unconstitutional two parts of a Texas state law concerning abortion provision
Whole Woman's Health v Hellersted (2016): struck down as unconstitutional two parts of a Texas state law concerning abortion provision
Significance: a woman's right to choose was held to have constitutionally
defined limits
defined limits
47 of 100
why was it significant
June Medical Services v Russo (2020): struck down as unconstitutional a
Louisiana state law significantly limiting abortion provision in the state
June Medical Services v Russo (2020): struck down as unconstitutional a
Louisiana state law significantly limiting abortion provision in the state
Significance: even after President Trump had appointed two conservative justices to the Court, pro-life groups remained disappointed in their aim to significantly limit abortion provision
48 of 100
what did the United States v Windsor (2013): declared the Defense of Marriage Act (1996) to be
unconstitutional and that it is unconstitutional to treat same-sex married couples differently from other married couples in terms of federal benefits
49 of 100
what is the significance
Obergefell v Hodges (2015): declared that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional
Obergefell v Hodges (2015): declared that state bans on same-sex marriage were unconstitutional
Significance: shows how the Court can reshape US society on a contemporary and contentious issue
50 of 100
why IS the Supreme Court a political institution
-Members are appointed by a politician (the president)
-Appointments are confirmed by politicians (the Senate)
-It makes decisions on issues that feature in elections (e.g. abortion, gun control, marriage equality) and over which the two main parties disa
-Appointments are confirmed by politicians (the Senate)
-It makes decisions on issues that feature in elections (e.g. abortion, gun control, marriage equality) and over which the two main parties disa
51 of 100
why IS the Supreme Court a political institution
-Some of its decisions have a quasi-legislative effect: it is as if a new law has been passed, and passing laws is what politicians do
-Some have described the Court as 'a third house of the legislature'
-Some have described the Court as 'a third house of the legislature'
52 of 100
why ISN'T the Supreme Court a political institution
-Its members are judges, not politicians
-The Court is independent - not subject to political pressure
-Justices do not involve themselves in party politics, elections, campaigning or endorsing candidates
-The Court is independent - not subject to political pressure
-Justices do not involve themselves in party politics, elections, campaigning or endorsing candidates
53 of 100
why ISN'T the Supreme Court a political institution
-There is no such thing as a Democratic justice or a Republican justice.
-Members make decisions based on legal and constitutional argument, not political ideology.
-Members make decisions based on legal and constitutional argument, not political ideology.
54 of 100
Through its power of judicial review, what does the Supreme Court also havethe power to do
rule on the actions of both Congress and the president, and to decide when, in the Court's judgement, they exceed their constitutional powers
55 of 100
National Federation of Independent Business v Sebelius (2012): upheld most of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act (2010) but what did they rule
but ruled that the Act's requirement that every American had either to get health insurance or to pay a penalty could not be justified by Congress's powers under the Commerce Clause, only by its power to collect taxes
56 of 100
what did National Labor Relations Board v Noel Canning (2014) rule
declared President Obama's
'recess appointments' to the NLRB in 2012 to be unconstitutional as the Senate was not technically in recess
'recess appointments' to the NLRB in 2012 to be unconstitutional as the Senate was not technically in recess
57 of 100
what was the significance of
Thump v Vance (2020): declared President Trump's claim of immunity from local law enforcement unconstitutional
Thump v Vance (2020): declared President Trump's claim of immunity from local law enforcement unconstitutional
Significance: the Court shows its power to say what Congress and the president can and cannot do according to its interpretation of their respective constitutional powers
58 of 100
how does congress check on the supreme courts power
-The Senate has the power to confirm or reject appointments
-Congress can initiate constitutional amendments that would have the effect of overturning the Court's decision
-Congress can initiate constitutional amendments that would have the effect of overturning the Court's decision
59 of 100
how does congress check on the supreme courts power
-Congress has the power of impeachment of individual judges - even the threat of impeachment is a check because it may act as a disincentive for a justice to completely overrule a decision or action carried out by the elected Congress
-Congress fixes the
-Congress fixes the
60 of 100
how does the president check on the supreme courts power
-The president has the power to nominate justices
-Presidents can decide whether to throw their political weight behind a decision of the Court, thereby either enhancing or decreasing the Court's perceived legitimacy.
-Presidents can decide whether to throw their political weight behind a decision of the Court, thereby either enhancing or decreasing the Court's perceived legitimacy.
61 of 100
what other checks are there on the supreme courts power
-The Court has no power of initiation: it must wait for cases to be brought before it.
-The Court has no enforcement powers: it is dependent on the other branches of government and/or the rule of law for implementation of and obedience to Court decisions
-The Court has no enforcement powers: it is dependent on the other branches of government and/or the rule of law for implementation of and obedience to Court decisions
62 of 100
what other checks are there on the supreme courts power
-The Court is checked by itself - by decisions it has already made.
-The Court can overturn a previous decision of the Court: for example, the decision in Ramos v Louisiana (2020) overturned the Court's decision in Apodaca v Oregon (1972)
-The Court is ch
-The Court can overturn a previous decision of the Court: for example, the decision in Ramos v Louisiana (2020) overturned the Court's decision in Apodaca v Oregon (1972)
-The Court is ch
63 of 100
the supreme court DOES have too much power
-The Court gave itself the power of judicial review
-It has declared more Acts of Congress
-It is checked by Congress, which may initiate
unconstitutional as the decades have passed
-It has made decisions that are out of line with the majority of publi
-It has declared more Acts of Congress
-It is checked by Congress, which may initiate
unconstitutional as the decades have passed
-It has made decisions that are out of line with the majority of publi
64 of 100
the supreme court DOES have too much power
-It is an unelected body
-It is a largely unaccountable body
-Some critics would say it has abused its power to bring about significant policy change (e.g. abortion,same-sex marriage)
-It could be seen in this way when justices believe in a living Cons
-It is a largely unaccountable body
-Some critics would say it has abused its power to bring about significant policy change (e.g. abortion,same-sex marriage)
-It could be seen in this way when justices believe in a living Cons
65 of 100
the supreme court does NOT have too much power
-it is checked by congress whihc may initiate constitutional amendments, effectively overriding court decisions
-Congress has the power of impeachment
-It has no initiative power: it must wait for cases to come before it
-Congress has the power of impeachment
-It has no initiative power: it must wait for cases to come before it
66 of 100
the supreme court does NOT have too much power
-It is dependent upon the rule of law and other branches of government to enforce its decisions
-Public opinion is a restraining force on the Court's power
-it is checked by the words of the constitution where they are precise and not open to interpreta
-Public opinion is a restraining force on the Court's power
-it is checked by the words of the constitution where they are precise and not open to interpreta
67 of 100
origins of the US supreme court
-was created by the founding fathers in 1787
-was written into the Constitution (Article III)
-was the only federal court created at that time
-shared building space with Congress until 1935
-then moved to a purpose-built building on Capitol Hill
-was written into the Constitution (Article III)
-was the only federal court created at that time
-shared building space with Congress until 1935
-then moved to a purpose-built building on Capitol Hill
68 of 100
origins of the UK supreme court
-was created by Act of Parliament
-came into existence in October 2009
-was the most recent part of the UK court structure to be created
-replaced the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords as the nation's highest court
-was given converted building
-came into existence in October 2009
-was the most recent part of the UK court structure to be created
-replaced the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords as the nation's highest court
-was given converted building
69 of 100
structural differnces between the US and the UK
Structural: whereas the USA is based on a system of 'separated institutions, sharing powers and checks and balances, the UK is based on a system of fused powers in which, until very recently, the three branches of government overlapped
70 of 100
cultural differnces between the US and the UK
Cultural: whereas the USA came into existence at one given moment - with the writing of the federal Constitution in 1787 - the UK has evolved gradually over centuries without a codified constitution
71 of 100
US methods of judicial appointment
Nominated by the president
Require confirmation by the
Senate
Require confirmation by the
Senate
72 of 100
UK method of judicial appointment
Nominated by the Judicial
Appointments Commission
No confirmation required
Appointments Commission
No confirmation required
73 of 100
US supreme court membership
-Currently 9 members
-Number fixed by Congress
-Currently includes
-3 women
-Presided over by the Chief
Justice of the United States
-All justices hear all cases (unless recused)
-Number fixed by Congress
-Currently includes
-3 women
-Presided over by the Chief
Justice of the United States
-All justices hear all cases (unless recused)
74 of 100
UK supreme court membership
Currently 12 members
Currently includes 2 women
Presided over by the
President of the Supreme Court
Between 5 and 11 justices hear cases
Currently includes 2 women
Presided over by the
President of the Supreme Court
Between 5 and 11 justices hear cases
75 of 100
US supreme court tenure
Life tenure
Subject to impeachment, trial and removal by Congress
Subject to impeachment, trial and removal by Congress
76 of 100
UK supreme court tenure
Must retire at 70 if appointed to a judicial office after 1995; otherwise 75
Subject to removal by
the monarch following an address by both houses of Parliament
Subject to removal by
the monarch following an address by both houses of Parliament
77 of 100
what is the most significant power of the US supreme court
the power of judicial review
78 of 100
judicial review in the US
-Not explicitly granted in the
Constitution
-'Found' by the Court in Marbury v
Madison (1803), i.e. the Court gave itself the power
Constitution
-'Found' by the Court in Marbury v
Madison (1803), i.e. the Court gave itself the power
79 of 100
judicial review in the US
-Judicial review is the power to declare
Acts (of the legislature) or actions (of the executive of the federal or state governments unconstitutional
-Resulted in greatly enhanced political
importance for the Court
Acts (of the legislature) or actions (of the executive of the federal or state governments unconstitutional
-Resulted in greatly enhanced political
importance for the Court
80 of 100
judicial review in th UK
-Judicial review does not allow the Court to declare Acts of Parliament unconstitutional because the Court operates in a system ruled by the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty
-But it can declare actions of ministers to be ultra vires, i.e. beyond the
-But it can declare actions of ministers to be ultra vires, i.e. beyond the
81 of 100
the powers and roles of the US supreme court
-Final court of appeal for federal cases
-Also hears cases on appeal from state supreme courts
-Rules on the constitutionality of federal and state laws
(iudicial review)
-Rules on the constitutionality of actions of the federal
and state executives (judi
-Also hears cases on appeal from state supreme courts
-Rules on the constitutionality of federal and state laws
(iudicial review)
-Rules on the constitutionality of actions of the federal
and state executives (judi
82 of 100
the powers and roles of the US supreme court
-Rules on the meaning of the Constitution
-Acts as interpreter and guardian of civil rights and
liberties
-Acts as interpreter and guardian of civil rights and
liberties
83 of 100
the powers and roles of the UK supreme court
-Final court of appeal for all UK civil cases and for
criminal cases in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
-Cannot overrule or strike down the laws passed by the UK Parliament - though can interpret the laws passed by Parliament
-Rules on whether or not
criminal cases in England, Wales and Northern Ireland
-Cannot overrule or strike down the laws passed by the UK Parliament - though can interpret the laws passed by Parliament
-Rules on whether or not
84 of 100
what is a vital ingredient in a democracy to ensure that judges are free from external pressures
judicial independence
85 of 100
what are these external pressures
the executive
the legislature
interest groups
the media
+other judges, especially senior judges
the legislature
interest groups
the media
+other judges, especially senior judges
86 of 100
Judicial independence is protected in both countries by the fact that?
judges have immunity from prosecution for any acts they carry out as judges
they have immunity from lawsuits of defamation for what they say while hearing cases
judges' salaries cannot be reduced
they have immunity from lawsuits of defamation for what they say while hearing cases
judges' salaries cannot be reduced
87 of 100
judicial independance in the US
-Judicial independence enhanced by life tenure
-Strengthened when justices decide a case in a way that is clearly not in line with the views of the president who appointed them (e.g. Clinton appointees who found against Clinton in Clinton v Jones (1997)
-Strengthened when justices decide a case in a way that is clearly not in line with the views of the president who appointed them (e.g. Clinton appointees who found against Clinton in Clinton v Jones (1997)
88 of 100
judicial indpendance in the US
-But seemingly undermined when judges appear to make politicised judgements (e.g. Bush v Gore (2000)
-Under pressure when presidents make verbal attacks on the judiciary or on individual judges (e.g. Trump over the Court's decision on his travel ban (20
-Under pressure when presidents make verbal attacks on the judiciary or on individual judges (e.g. Trump over the Court's decision on his travel ban (20
89 of 100
judicial indpendance in the UK
-Judicial independence was previously somewhat
compromised when the Law Lords sat in the House of Lords (were part of the legislature)
-Still some ambiguities in roles of Lord Chancellor, Attorney General and Solicitor General
compromised when the Law Lords sat in the House of Lords (were part of the legislature)
-Still some ambiguities in roles of Lord Chancellor, Attorney General and Solicitor General
90 of 100
judicial independence in the UK
-Under pressure recently from attacks by politicians, notably about the High Court's ruling on the triggering of Article 50 in the Brexit implementation (2016)
-Recent media attacks on the judiciary as enemies of the people' after judges ruled that Brexi
-Recent media attacks on the judiciary as enemies of the people' after judges ruled that Brexi
91 of 100
origin of the supreme court cultural approach
Created by the Constitution in the USA whereas in the UK the Supreme Court has been created only recently-making it easier to ensure complete independence of justices
92 of 100
appointment of justices rational approach
The factors which influence a president's choice of nominee to the US Court - how do these differ from how a prime minister 'chooses' a new justice? The US president has significant ability to fill a vacant position with someone who suits their self-inter
93 of 100
appointment of justices cultural approach
The factors which influence
a president's choice of nominee to the US
Court - how do these differ from how a prime minister 'chooses' a new justice? The US president
usually nominates a justice who shares their political opinions or at least has acted in
a president's choice of nominee to the US
Court - how do these differ from how a prime minister 'chooses' a new justice? The US president
usually nominates a justice who shares their political opinions or at least has acted in
94 of 100
appointment of justices structural approach
A comparison of the structure of the process for appointing justices in each country
95 of 100
powers and roles structural approach
The differences in the powers and checks on these powers in each country due to the different political structures in the USA and the UK (e.g. parliamentary sovereignty; constitutional checks and balances; separation of powers; federalism versus unitary s
96 of 100
judicial independance rational approach
How the concept of life tenure may influence judicial behaviour in both countries
97 of 100
judicial independance cultural approach
The pressure that judges come under from the media at times
Examples of when either supreme
court has been forced to make political powers in the UK system. judgements (e.g. in the case of Brexit in the UK and the Bush v Gore election result in the USA i
Examples of when either supreme
court has been forced to make political powers in the UK system. judgements (e.g. in the case of Brexit in the UK and the Bush v Gore election result in the USA i
98 of 100
judicial independance structural approach
The concept of the separation of powers in the USA as compared with the fusion ofpowers in the UK system
99 of 100
THE US SUPREME COURT
THE US SUPREME COURT
100 of 100
Other cards in this set
Card 2
Front
Who are the justices nominated by
Back
the president
Card 3
Front
how does there appointment get confirmed
Back
Card 4
Front
how lonmg are justices appointed for and how do they leave service
Back
Card 5
Front
what are the 2 main strands of judicail philosophy
Back
Similar Government & Politics resources:
0.0 / 5
4.5 / 5 based on 2 ratings
0.0 / 5
0.0 / 5
0.0 / 5
4.0 / 5 based on 2 ratings
Comments
No comments have yet been made