Blog 5

1. A Supreme Court that demonstrates a willingness to change public policy and alter judicial precedent is said to be engaging in

a) judicial activism
b) due process
c) judicial restraint
d) ex post facto lawmaking
e) judicial review

The correct answer is A because judicial activism is making decisions in cases that change laws, for example Brown vs. Board.  

2. A writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court indicates that the Court

a) Will review a lower decision

b) Has rendered a decision on a case

c) Has decided not to hear an appeal

d) Will recess until the end of the calendar year

e) Plans to overturn one of its previous rulings

The correct answer is A because writ of certiorari means seeking review of the lower court decision.

3. The Supreme Court holds original jurisdiction in all of the following types of cases EXCEPT

a) If the United States is a party in the case

b) In controversies in criminal law between a citizen and a state

c) In controversies under the Constitution, federal laws, or treaties

d) if a case is between citizens of different states

e) If cases arise under admirality and maritime laws

The correct answer is D because circuit courts handle this 

4. All of the following are specifically mentioned in the Constitution EXCEPT

a) judicial review

b) the national census

c) rules of impeachment

d) the State of the Union address

e) length of term if federal judgeships

The correct answer is D because it is not mentioned in the constitution

5. Which of the following correctly states the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries?

a) Federal courts are higher courts than state courts and may overturn state decisions on any grounds.

b)The two are entirely autonomous, and neither ever hears cases that originate in the other.

c) The two are generally autonomous, although federal courts may rule on the constitutionality of state court decisions.

d) State courts are trial courts; federal courts are appeals courts.

e) State courts try all cases except those that involve conflicts between two states, which are tried in federal courts.

The correct answer is E because state courts only deal with cases within their state and nothing outside. 

6. The Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona was based mainly on the

a) Constitutional prohibition of ex post facto laws

b) Incorporation of the Fifth Amendment through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment

c) Eighth Amendment restriction against cruel and unusual punishment

d) Abolition of slavery by the Fourteenth Amendment

e) full faith and credit clause of the Constitution

The correct answer is B because in the case Miranda appealed against not being read his rights. 

7. The Supreme Court has used the practice of selective incorporation to

a) Limit the number of appeals filed by defendants in state courts

b) Extend voting rights to racial minorities and women
c) apply most Bill of Rights protections to state law

d) Hasten the integration of public schools

e) Prevent the states from calling a constitutional convention

The correct answer is A because not all cases need appeals

8. Which of the following cases extended the Fourth Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures to the states?

a) Gideon v. Wainwright

b) Schneck v. United States
c) Miranda v. Arizona

d) Mapp v. Ohio

e) Heart of Atlanta Motel v. United States

The correct answer is D because the evidence in the case was gained without consent of search and seizure

9. Which of the following is true of court cases in which one private party is suing another?

A) They are tried in civil court

B) The federal court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them

C) They are tried in criminal court

D) The state court system has exclusive jurisdiction over them.

E) They are tried before a grand jury.

The correct answer is A because neither is criminal or a large cooperation

10. Which of the following is an accurate statement about the federal court system?

a) The creation of new federal courts requires a constitutional amendment

b) The creation of new federal courts requires the unanimous consent of all 50 states

c) The Supreme Court has the sole power to create new federal courts.

d) Congress had the power to create new federal courts

e) The number of federal courts if fixed by the Constitution and cannot be changed.

The correct answer is D because of checks and balances

Blog 4

Miranda vs. Arizona-
In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested for the crimes of both kidnapping and rape. The police interrogated Miranda without informing him of his Constitutional rights, and during the interrogation Miranda confessed to the crimes. He was sentenced to 20-30 years in prison. He appealed first to the Arizona Supreme Court, who agreed with his prior ruling, then to the Supreme court who reviewed his case. With the 5-4 vote, the court ruled in favor of Miranda. The court stated the previous rulings went against both the 5th and 6th amendment. The supreme court held in priority the Constitution in this case. Miranda was charged with serious crimes and they could have overlooked the claim to make him serve out his full sentence. Instead they choose the more important of the two situations and they knew by making this decision, they would also be changing how people were being tried across all legal courts.    

U.S. vs. Nixon-
In 1974, after the Watergate affair, seven of Nixon's closest aid were found guilty of their crimes. The court tried to find any video recording and evidence to find Nixon guilty. Nixon declared executive privilege so he would not have to appear in court. The final decision was unanimous against Nixon, finding him guilty. Usually when a president uses executive privilege, no other branch can use anything against him. It it their power over all for the other branches. Here, the Supreme Court did not abide by the normal rules. With or without his testimony, the court believed with the criminal charges against Nixon he had no right not to testify. The fact he used the executive privilege made him only seem more guilty. The supreme court used activism in this case. Before, no one had really ever challenged the president and his powers. The court dismissed the fact he had executive privilege for the benefit of the case.      

Bush vs. Gore-
On December 8, 2000, the Florida Supreme Court ordered the Circuit Court in Leon County to count 9,000 ballots. They also ordered every county in Florida to recount all ballots where the president vote was not identified. Bush called for the Supreme Court to review the decision. The court voted 5-4 in favor of Bush, stopping the recount of ballots. Both parts of the Supreme court, those who voted for Bush and against him, voted how they did in respect to the constitution. The supreme court used restraint in this case because though the case was important no law was really changed or nothing great came of the ruling.

Blog 3

The cartoonist takes the position of the court only making decisions based on how they feel. The judges in the cartoon feel like all the cases that day are all unconstitutional, so that is how they will rule them. I disagree with this statement. I feel the court is put in place to review each case individually and they make decisions bases on the facts of the case, not just how they are feeling. One example is Marbury vs. Madison. In this case, the court said their power is implied from the supremacy clause in the Constitution. Another example is Brown vs. the Board of Education which ended with the court ruling Separate is not equal. The court makes it's own decisions based on the case facts and the Constitution. The Supreme court judges do not take action based on how they are feeling as shown in the cartoon.

Blog 2

When the judiciary was first established, anti-federalists were very concerned with the idea. Even though in Federalist No. 78 Alexander Hamilton argued this would be the least threatening branch of government, Anti-Federalists though it would be the most threatening because they had control over all of the law.  In 1803, the Case of Marbury vs.  Madison asserts the court's judicial review power is implied from the supremacy clause in the Constitution.  The judiciary can name laws and bills unconstitutional, make treaties, and charge criminals with a sentence.

Blog 1

I am Lauren Nichole and I am a senior at Hillsdale High School. I have never had a blog before but I believe this will be much better then just writing in my notebook. Here I think I will try more so I don't sound stupid on the internet.