Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
The Us Supreme Court (scotus) (key cases (Roe V Wade 1973 (found that…
The Us Supreme Court (scotus)
key cases
Roe V Wade 1973
found that Texan anti Abortion laws were Unconstitutional
this made abortion a protected right s
Whole woman's health V Hellerstedt 2016
found that Texas abortion laws which made increased the standards to the point the majority of clinics closed down due to these new standards.
the courts found that the new abortion laws were unconstitutional due to it effecting Roe vs Wade. this was significant due to it showing that not all limits on abortion were constitutional
citizens untied : vs FEC 2016
it saw the bipartisan campaign reform act of 2002 being overturned. This removed all restrictions for the maximum amount a person or corporation was at to donate to a Candidate.
the supreme courts found it that the bipartisan reform act was a breach of the first amendment this could lead to corruption and has seen campaigns become more expensive.
DC v Heller 2008
in Washington 2002 Robert levy a member of the Cato institute challenged the DC law that banned guns since 1976. He and six residents sued Washington DC about the breach of the second amendment. Dick heller was the key representative due to him guns as a security officer. In 2008 the case made its way up to the supreme court. The court found that breached the second amendment 5-4
This case was significant. firstly due to it being the first case on gun rights in the supreme court. It also found that "a well-regulated militia" was different from "the right of the people to keep and bear arms but they found that it's not unlimited along with it not being a Right and that weapons that are seen as too dangerous and not used for hunting can be banned.
Obergefall vs Hodges 2015
James Obergefall and John Arther gay couple from Ohio went to Maryland to get married due to Ohio not allowing gay marriage and when they returned Ohio refused to allow the James to be John (who was dying due to ALS) to be his living spouse on James death certificate. which led to them suing the state which the state court approved but it was then rejected by the sixth court of appeals. it was then taken up by SCOTUS
5-4 decision by soctus in favor of gay marriage. they found that the 14th admedment protected gay marriage and forced states to recognize it. it also saw it as a fundamental right.
Kelo v. City of New London (2005)
in 2005 the city of new london connecticut used the “taking clause” of the fifth amendment to sell land to gain more public income. But the occupants argued that selling the land for economic gain was not public use and that it violated their rights. The supreme court ruled in favour of the city. They found that public use was the same as public purpose. This was significant due to it defining what public purpose. It is also seen as the most controversial due to the librealterians and conservatives seen it as a gross misstep of the federal government
this cas is seen as a contervial move of judical activeism
nomination
vacancies in the supreme court are caused by a justices death, resignation or impeachment which tends to occur twice in every 4 years
Samuel chase is the only justice to be impeached by the house in 1804 but it was thrown out by the senate in 1805 due to Thomas Jefferson wanting it due to chase being a federalist
They are then interviewed by the American bar Association and the FBI which looks into their background and legal experience.
they are then questioned by the senate nomination committee and the committee also makes a descions to approve weather or not the person is qualified for the role of supreme justice.
Robert Bork in 1987 was nominated by Reagan and he was seen as an overall accomplished justice. But he failed his nomination due to his political standing. he was the last outright denied justice.
Sonya Sotomayour in 2009 was nominated as the first Hispanic justice. But her overall character was critiqued due to her comments on the justices of the past due to their race and gender with her claiming a single Latina could do a better job than a white man
Elena Kagaan in 2010 was heavily critiqued for her lack of legal background with the bar assotiaon claiming she was the least qualified candidate in the last 50 years
on the 3rd of October Harriet Myers withdrew her nomination after being heavily critiqued by the BAR association and pressure groups due to her being a lawyer and not a barrister.
reasons for nomination
judicial ability
people are likely to be nominated if they preform well in the courts and have a good track record. Elena Kagaan was critised from her lack of experience
political motivations
a president can use a nomination as a strong bargaining chip with the opposing party to help them pass controversial legislation
ideology
a person is more likely to get nominated if they are similar politically to the president . Obama had to distance himself from Sonya Sotomayour
social charatistics
presidents tended to go for people from. diffrent states to get a wide net of different onions and to be more representative. but this now has shifted to physical attributes such as race and gender
protection of SCOTUS
they are justices for Life and cant be removed by the executive
the appointment process makes sure they dont have any conflicts of intrest
their pay is protected by article III of the constitution
Justices rarely directly interact with the other branches to prevent the m being influenced
judicial review
Given to the Court through the case Marbury v. Madison 1803
It is a self Given power to review actions or legislation of Congress and the executive.
Judicial Activism
these are justices that are willing to challenge or change the Constitution
This has led to concerns of an imperial Judiciary which is overbearing in it power due to justices being able to change to constitution with out being contested. this has led to some justices being unwilling to challenge it
judicial restraint
these are justices follow the constitution to the t and are reluctant to change it
Originalists are stricter is similar but stricter with them trying to follow the original ideas of the FF or the group that wrote the admendment
courts (lower to higher)
state
lower state court
state supreme court
fedreal
us district court
us court of appeals
the US supreme court
appellate jurisdiction
these are cases that are taken by SCOTUS after they have passed through lower courts
out of the 10,000 1% are heard
original jurisdiction
these are cases involving ambassadors, people sueing states and states suing states