Transcription
Hey everybody, welcome back. It's the third branch: the Judiciary. So drop the gavel on that like button and let's get started. [Music]
Branch number three, the often overlooked judicial branch. Article 3 of The Constitution lays out a basic framework for the Judiciary, but really, it doesn't say much. It's clear that this Branch was almost an afterthought and totally not the co-equal branch we view it as today. But all that changed in 1803 with the landmark ruling in Marbury versus Madison, the most significant case in Supreme Court history. This Case established judicial review, dramatically elevating the power and relevance of the judicial branch.
Well, why? What's the big deal? Well, with its newfound power of judicial review, the Supreme Court can rule on the constitutionality of stuff, including federal laws, executive orders and actions, and even state laws. This is a huge deal because now the court can decide whether things the other branches and states are doing go against the Constitution, and they can strike down things that they say go against it. As crazy as it may sound, judicial review was not mentioned in the Constitution. The court totally gave themselves their most significant power; that's wild. Can't make this stuff up. It was mentioned in Federalist 78 though, so it's not like they totally made it up out of thin air. Again, check out the Federalist 78 video for all the details.
But there are three main ideas for us to focus on, and they all go together. Hamilton argued that we needed an independent Judiciary that could exercise the power of judicial review and defend the limited government set up by the Constitution by avoiding laws that conflict with the Constitution. To allow for this, the Constitution granted federal judges their jobs for life, but more on that in another video.
Going back to Article 3, it established a Supreme Court and then gave Congress the power to establish lower courts. So let's spend a minute on some of the nuts and bolts of the federal court system. Before discussing the types of Courts, let's begin with jurisdiction. Jurisdiction refers to the legal authority to hear a case, and there are two types. Original jurisdiction means the court is the first court to hear a particular case and rules on the merits of the case, while appellate jurisdiction means that the court is hearing an appeal and therefore isn't deciding who's right or who's wrong or whether the person is guilty or not guilty, but rather they're hearing an appeal about the legal issues surrounding the case. Maybe the person believes that their original trial wasn't fair for some reason, or that their rights were violated, or that a policy is unconstitutional.
District courts are the lowest type of federal court, and this is where the vast majority of federal cases begin. The only type of jurisdiction district courts have is original jurisdiction. Above district courts are circuit courts of appeals. As the name suggests, these courts only have appellate jurisdiction, so they hear appeals of cases that originated in District Courts.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States, and it has both original and appellate jurisdiction. There are a few types of cases that the Constitution says go straight to the Supreme Court, but honestly, you don't need to know them, so I wouldn't worry about that too much, at least in this class. Most Supreme Court cases are selected from their appellate jurisdiction, meaning that the Supreme Court typically has the power to select its caseload, the cases they hear, deciding whether or not to even hear a case in the first place. Thousands of cases are appealed to the Supreme Court each year, and they ultimately only hear about 60 to 80, or fewer than one percent of the appeals.
When selecting cases from its appellate jurisdiction, the court follows the informal rule of four. So if any four justices vote to hear the case, the court will do so. This rule isn't in the Constitution, but it's what the court goes by. When the Court decides to hear a case, it issues a writ of certiorari. Don't worry, just call it a writ of cert. That is a request for all lower court documents related to the case. This also publicly signals that the court is taking up the case.
Most often, the Supreme Court selects a case for one of a few reasons: if it involves a significant constitutional issue, or if two different lower courts have ruled differently on the same issue, the court is likely to take the case; or if it involves a civil rights or civil liberties issue; or if the federal government appeals to have the case heard. Again, the Supreme Court will likely hear it. There's also the matter about whether the issue is justiciable, meaning is it able to be decided by a court? The court rules on legal and constitutional issues, not political issues. There's also the related issue of standing. In order to bring a case to the Supreme Court, somebody must show that they've been harmed by whatever policy they're challenging. The court doesn't hear hypothetical cases about you thinking that a law is unconstitutional; you have to show harm, otherwise the Supreme Court won't rule on the case. Although, if I'm being totally honest, what does or doesn't constitute standing isn't always super consistent, so what I told you is correct for a test, but maybe not exactly how it always happens in reality.
Alright, well that's it for this one. Don't drive yourself crazy with a detailed vocab; focus on the Big Ideas: judicial review, Marbury versus Madison, and Federalist 78, and you'll be good until next time. This has been a Money Production. Thanks again for watching. You already know, make sure that like button has been smashed, subscribe, and hey, maybe tell a friend about the ultimate view packet, and I will see you in the next video.