Intermediate Appellate Courts

  In 1948 only 11 states had an intermediate appellate court system. By the late 1990s nearly 40 states had established such courts to relieve the pressure on their supreme courts, which were being inundated by appeals. As in the federal system, state intermediate appellate courts hear appeals from both criminal and civil trial courts within their geographic regions. The larger states generally have more than one intermediate appellate court.

Supreme Appellate Courts

  Every state has a final Appellate Court. In most states these are called Supreme Courts, but in New York and Maryland they are known as the Court of Appeals. Oklahoma and Texas have two such courts, one for criminal and the other for civil appeals. The State Supreme Courts hear appeals mostly from Intermediate Appeals Courts. Most Supreme Courts may choose which cases to review, and all have the final word on matters of state law—that is, common law, statutes, and the state constitution. Not even the US Supreme Court may overturn their decisions about what the state constitution or state law means, although it may rule against the state if it concludes that a state law or constitutional provision conflicts with the US Constitution. State Supreme Courts typically consist of between five and nine members who rule as a panel.

(3841)

TEXT 34 THE SUPREME COURT

Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the United States and the chief authority in the judicial branch, one of three branches of the United States federal government. The Supreme Court hears appeals from decisions of lower federal courts and State Supreme Courts, and it resolves issues of constitutional and federal law. It stands as the ultimate authority in constitutional interpretation, and its decisions can be changed only by a constitutional amendment.

Nine judges sit on the Court: the Chief Justice of the United States and eight Associate Justices. The President of the United States appoints them to the Court for life terms, but the US Senate must approve each appointment with a majority vote. Justices and Court staff work in the Supreme Court Building, constructed in 1935, across the street from the Capitol in Washington, D.C. Before 1935 the Justices met in various rooms in the Capitol and elsewhere.

The Supreme Court wields complete authority over the federal courts, but it has only limited power over state courts. The Court has the final word on cases heard by federal courts, and it writes procedures that these courts must follow. All federal courts must abide by the Supreme Court's interpretation of federal laws and the Constitution of the United States. The Supreme Court's interpretations of federal law and the Constitution also apply to the state courts, but the Court cannot interpret state law or issues arising under state constitutions, and it does not supervise state court operations.

The Supreme Court's most important responsibility is to decide cases that raise questions of constitutional interpretation. The Court decides if a law or government action violates the Constitution. This power, known as judicial review, enables the Court to invalidate both federal and state laws when they conflict with its interpretation of the Constitution. Judicial review thus puts the Supreme Court in a pivotal role in the American political system, making it the referee in disputes among various branches of government, and as the ultimate authority for many of the most important issues in the country. The Court's constitutional decisions have affected virtually every area of American life, from the basic ways in which business and the economy are regulated to freedom of speech and religion.

POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

  The Supreme Court is the only court mentioned by name in the Constitution. Article III establishes the Court as the top of the country's judicial branch, making it equal to the executive branch (the President) and the legislative branch (Congress). Article III also gives the Court jurisdiction (authority to review) broad classes of cases. In 1803 in Marbury v.⁴⁷ Madison the Court interpreted its own authority, ruling that the Constitution gave it the power to strike down unconstitutional acts of government—that is, laws or other government conduct that violate the Constitution. This decision created the power of judicial review, an essential component in the American system of checks and balances, which is intended to safeguard Americans from government abuses of power.

JURISDICTION

  Article III gives the Supreme Court two types of jurisdiction. The Court’s most important jurisdiction is appellate, the power to hear appeals of cases decided in lower federal courts and State Supreme Courts. Under Article III, the Court's appellate jurisdiction extends to seven classes of cases: (1) cases arising under the Constitution, federal law, or treaty; (2) those involving admiralty and maritime matters; (3) those in which the United States itself is a party; (4) cases between two or more states; (5) cases between citizens of different states or foreign countries; (6) cases between a state and individuals or foreign countries; and (7) cases between citizens of the same state if they are disputing ownership of land given by different states. The first category is the most important. In these cases, part of the federal question jurisdiction, the Court issues its most far-reaching constitutional decisions and other major rulings involving federal law.

The Supreme Court has a far less important authority known as its original jurisdiction, which includes cases that have not been previously heard in other courts. This gives the Court the power to sit as a trial court to hear cases affecting ambassadors and other foreign officials, and in cases in which a state is a party. The Court rarely exercises its original jurisdiction, since Congress has granted concurrent jurisdiction over most of these cases to the lower courts. Only disputes between two or more states must be heard initially in the Supreme Court. In 1997 and 1998, for example, it heard a dispute between New York and New Jersey over the ownership of Ellis Island.

Congress cannot alter the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction, but Article III of the Constitution gives it power to control the Court's appellate jurisdiction. The Court may not exercise any of its appellate jurisdictions without congressional authorization, and Congress may limit the appellate jurisdiction however it chooses. Congress has authorized the Court to use its full appellate jurisdiction, except on rare occasions.

(4424)

JUDICIAL REVIEW

  The Supreme Court's principle power is judicial review - the right of the Court to declare laws unconstitutional. This authority is not expressly stated in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has exercised judicial review since 1803, when Chief Justice John Marshall first announced it in Marbury v. Madison. Marshall deduced the necessity of such a power from the purpose and existence of the Constitution. He reasoned that judicial review was necessary to implement the Constitution's substantive and procedural limits on the government. If the Court could not strike down a law that conflicted with the Constitution, Marshall said, then the legislature would have a "real and practical omnipotence." Judicial review is both a powerful and controversial tool because it allows the Supreme Court to have the ultimate word on what the Constitution means. This permits the Court justices - who are appointed rather than elected - to overrule decisions already made by Congress and legislatures throughout the country.

MEMBERSHIP AND QUALIFICATIONS

  The Constitution does not specify the number of justices on the Supreme Court, leaving the issue to Congress. The first Supreme Court in 1789 consisted of five justices. Initially the justices' duties included traveling through the country to hear cases in federal circuit courts. Congress added a sixth seat in 1790 and a seventh in 1807 to ease the strain on justices as the number of circuit courts increased. Congress added the eighth and ninth seats in 1837. Membership stayed at nine until 1863, when Congress added a tenth seat, only to abolish it when a justice died in 1865. In 1867 Congress reduced the seats to seven to limit the opportunity of President Andrew Johnson to appoint new members. Congress restored the number of seats to nine in 1869, and in 1891 abolished the Supreme Court justices’ circuit-riding burden. The number of justices has remained fixed at nine, making tie votes unlikely unless circumstances prevent a justice from participating in deliberations.

 The Constitution does not specify formal qualifications for membership on the Supreme Court. From the beginning, though, justices have all been lawyers, and most pursued legal and political careers before serving on the Court. Many justices served as members of Congress, governors, or members of the Cabinet. One President, William Howard Taft, was later appointed Chief Justice. Some Justices came to the Court from private law practice, and others were appointed from positions as law professors. Many Justices appointed in the second half of the 20th century had experience in the United States Courts of Appeal and other lower courts. Only one Justice, Charles Evans Hughes, served on the Court twice. President Taft appointed Hughes, then governor of New York, to the Court in 1910. Hughes gave up his Court seat in 1916 to run for President, but he lost in a close race against Woodrow Wilson. In 1930 President Herbert Hoover returned Hughes to the Court as chief justice.

(4300)

APPOINTMENT AND CONFIRMATION

  Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President and must be confirmed by a majority vote in the Senate. The President usually chooses the nominees carefully to minimize the possibility that the justice will veer far from the administration's own agenda after he or she is confirmed. The President must also be careful to select a nominee with strong chances for Senate confirmation, otherwise the administration may lose prestige in a bruising confirmation battle with the Senate. Presidents often try to secure Senate support by balancing the Court's geographic and regional background. Many 20th-century Presidents have also tried to balance the Court's religious, racial, ethnic, and gender makeup.

Only Protestants served on the Court until 1836, when the Senate confirmed President Andrew Jackson's nomination of Roger B. Taney, a Catholic. Since then there has almost always been a Catholic on the Court.

On average, the Senate rejects about 20 percent of all nominees to the Supreme Court. The President's choice must face questioning by the Senate Judiciary Committee, which then makes a recommendation to the Senate as a whole. The Senate began asking nominees to appear before the Judiciary Committee only in 1925, when President Calvin Coolidge's nomination of Harlan Fiske Stone was in jeopardy. Felix Frankfurter, a nominee of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1939. Such appearances before the committee became accepted practice in 1955, when John M. Harlan testified.

Confirmation hearings are sometimes polite, quiet affairs, but some have been intensely political dramas that have gripped the nation. In 1987, for example, the Senate held 12 days of rancorous hearings into President Ronald Reagan's nomination of Judge Robert Bork. Although Bork had strong qualifications, his conservative views led many groups throughout the country to oppose his nomination. Some senators charged that he had undergone a "confirmation conversion"—contradicting his earlier published views to secure appointment. The full Senate defeated the nomination by a vote of 58 to 42. In 1991 President George Bush nominated Judge Clarence Thomas to replace the ailing Thurgood Marshall. An initial debate over his qualifications gave way to a nationally televised drama over a leaked accusation by Oklahoma University Law School Professor Anita Hill that Thomas had sexually harassed her. Thomas bitterly denied the allegations, charging that he was the victim of a "high-tech lynching." The Senate eventually confirmed him by a vote of 52 to 48, the second closest vote in history.

REMOVAL FROM OFFICE

Justices serve lifetime appointments. Under the Constitution they can be removed from the Court only by first being impeached (accused) by a majority vote of the US House of Representatives and then convicted by a two-thirds vote of the Senate. There is no precise standard for determining whether a Justice has committed an impeachable offense, though the consensus is that removal should be for criminal or ethical lapses, not for partisan political reasons. No Justice has ever been removed through this process, and only one Justice of the Supreme Court has ever been impeached. In 1805 Justice Samuel Chase was impeached in the House by his political enemies, but the Senate failed to convict when it became apparent that Chase's opponents were after him not because he had committed any wrongdoing but because they disagreed with his decisions. The possibility of impeachment may have been a factor in the resignation of Justice Abe Fortas, who left the Court in 1969 after allegations surfaced that he had accepted a questionable fee from a private foundation. Some conservative groups rallied for the removal of Chief Justice Earl Warren in the 1960s, but their efforts failed.

In the wake of the controversy over Abe Fortas's financial practices, the Court became more restrained in its public activities. Once confirmed to the Court, Justices try to ensure that their investments and outside income do not bring their integrity into question. Common practice now dictates that Justices also remove themselves from politics, refraining from speaking out about controversial issues or pending legislation⁴⁸. The Justices can make public speeches, but these are usually confined to subjects related to the law in general and to the federal court system. In these and other questions of judicial ethics the Court usually follows the American Bar Association (ABA) Code of Judicial Conduct, although these rules are not binding on the Court.

(3892)

THE WORK OF THE COURT

  The Supreme Court hears only a tiny fraction of the cases that come before it. When the Court declines to hear a case, the decision of the lower court stands as the final word on the case. Each year the Court receives thousands of petitions to hear cases, but it usually decides to consider only a few. In 1995, for example, the Court had 7565 cases on its docket⁴⁹, and the justices heard oral arguments in just 90 and issued signed opinions—written explanations of its decisions—in only 75. Ten years earlier the Court's docket had been much smaller, consisting of 5185 cases, although it issued signed opinions in 151 cases.

The growth in petitions has many causes: a larger population, a more complex economy, and the proliferation of business and other relationships. Adding to the Court's workload is a steady growth in congressional and state legislation that requires judicial interpretation, and an increasing number of constitutional and other issues that can be reviewed in the federal courts.

By law the Court's term begins the first Monday in October and usually runs through the end of June, after disposing of all cases that have been argued during the term. On rare occasions, when a critical case has arisen, the Court has heard arguments and issued decisions in the summer; for example, in 1974 the Court issued its decision in United States v. Nixon, the Watergate tapes case, on July 24.

The Court does not meet continuously in formal sessions during its nine-month term. Instead, the Court divides its time into four separate but related activities. First, some time is allocated to reading through the thousands of petitions for review of cases that come annually to the Court. This time is not formally assigned but is available during the summer and during those periods when the Court is not sitting to hear cases. Second, the Court allocates blocks of time for oral arguments - the live discussion in which lawyers for both sides present their clients' positions to the Justices. From October through April, the Justices meet in blocks of two consecutive weeks on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Wednesdays to hear oral arguments. These public sessions run from 10 AM to 3 PM, with a one-hour lunch recess, giving the Court time to hear from lawyers in four cases each day.

During the weeks of oral arguments the Court sets aside its third allotment of time, for private discussions of how each justice will vote on the cases they have just heard. Time is also allowed for the Justices to discuss which additional cases to hear. These private discussions are usually held on Wednesday afternoons and Fridays during the weeks of oral arguments. The Justices set aside a fourth block of time to work on writing their opinions—the statements of what the justices have decided and their reasoning in the case. This writing period is usually in the weeks following each two weeks of oral argument.

The Chief Justice presides at the justices' conferences and assigns a Justice to write opinions. The Chief Justice also acts as spokesperson for the Court and for the federal judicial system, and supervises the Court's budget and administrative staff. But in the central matter of hearing and deciding cases, the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices are equals.

For a major government institution, the Supreme Court has a relatively small staff of about 325 people. The Court's annual budget is about $30 million, a tiny fraction of the total budget for the federal judiciary, which stood at $3.1 billion in 1996. Congress's annual budget that year was about $2 billion. In 1996 Congress set the Chief Justice's salary at $171,500, and the Associate Justices' at $164,100.

The clerk of the Court serves as the Supreme Court's chief administrative officer, supervising a staff of 30 under the guidance of the chief justice. The marshal of the Court supervises all building operations. The reporter of decisions oversees the printing and publication of the Court's decisions. Other key personnel are the librarian and the public information officer. In addition, each Justice is entitled to hire four law clerks, almost always recent top graduates of law schools, many of whom have served clerkships in a lower court the previous year.

(3539)