11.2 How Does the Judiciary Take Action?
3 min read•june 18, 2024
The judiciary plays a crucial role in shaping policy through and interpretation of laws. Courts can invalidate unconstitutional actions and clarify ambiguities in legislation, significantly impacting public policy. Their decisions on like desegregation and abortion rights have far-reaching consequences.
While the judiciary wields considerable power, it also faces limitations. Courts lack enforcement mechanisms and must adhere to doctrines. Various factors influence judicial decisions, including legal precedent, public opinion, and political pressures. Maintaining is vital for the .
The Judiciary's Role in Policymaking
Judiciary's role in policymaking
Top images from around the web for Judiciary's role in policymaking
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
U. S. Courts: How do courts interpret contracts and laws? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
U. S. Courts: How do courts interpret contracts and laws? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
Top images from around the web for Judiciary's role in policymaking
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
U. S. Courts: How do courts interpret contracts and laws? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
Brown v. Board of Education - Wikipedia View original
Is this image relevant?
U. S. Courts: How do courts interpret contracts and laws? | United States Government View original
Is this image relevant?
1 of 3
- Exercises judicial review, the power to review and invalidate laws and executive actions that violate the Constitution ()
- Interprets and applies laws passed by the legislative branch, clarifying ambiguities and resolving conflicts in legislation ()
- Shapes policy through decisions, with rulings having significant policy implications ( on school desegregation, on abortion rights)
- Engages in to determine the meaning and application of the Constitution in specific cases
Powers and limits of judicial branch
- Powers:
- Conducts judicial review, reviewing and invalidating unconstitutional laws and executive actions
- Issues writs and orders, such as compelling government officials to perform duties and prohibiting or requiring specific actions
- Resolves disputes between parties, settling legal conflicts and controversies
- Exercises , reviewing decisions of lower courts
- Limitations:
- Lacks an enforcement mechanism, relying on the executive branch to enforce its decisions
- Has limited jurisdiction, with federal courts only hearing cases involving federal law, the Constitution, or disputes between states or citizens of different states
- Bound by justiciability doctrines, requiring plaintiffs to demonstrate (concrete injury caused by defendant), cases to involve ongoing controversies (), and cases to be sufficiently developed for judicial review ()
- Practices , deferring to other branches of government when appropriate
Influences on judicial decisions
- Legal precedent influences decisions through , the principle of adhering to previous court decisions, with lower courts bound by higher court decisions, providing stability and predictability
- Public opinion can impact judges, particularly in high-profile cases attracting significant public attention and pressure (Supreme Court's shift on same-sex marriage in )
- Political pressures shape judicial decisions through:
- Appointment process, with presidents nominating and the Senate confirming federal judges, often appointing those sharing their ideological views
- Congressional checks, with Congress able to impeach and remove federal judges for misconduct and alter the jurisdiction of federal courts
- Interest group influence, through briefs providing input on cases and lobbying efforts shaping public opinion and indirectly influencing decisions
Judicial Independence and Separation of Powers
- ensures that judges can make decisions free from political influence or pressure
- The concept of divides government authority among three branches, with the judiciary serving as a check on the executive and legislative branches
- This system helps maintain the balance of power and prevents any single branch from becoming too powerful
Key Terms to Review (28)
Amicus Curiae: An amicus curiae, or 'friend of the court,' is a party who is not directly involved in a legal case but offers information, expertise, or arguments that may be relevant to the court's decision. Amicus curiae briefs are commonly filed in appellate courts to provide additional perspectives on the issues being considered.
Appellate Jurisdiction: Appellate jurisdiction refers to the authority of a higher court to review and potentially overturn or modify the decisions made by a lower court. It is a crucial aspect of the judicial system, ensuring fairness and consistency in the application of laws.
Brown v. Board of Education: Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark 1954 Supreme Court case that overturned the 'separate but equal' doctrine established in Plessy v. Ferguson, declaring state laws that segregated public schools unconstitutional. This historic decision was a pivotal moment in the Civil Rights Movement, paving the way for greater government action to bring about civil rights change and setting the stage for the judiciary to play a more active role in addressing issues of discrimination.
Constitutional Interpretation: Constitutional interpretation is the process by which the meaning and application of the provisions in a constitution are determined. It involves analyzing the text, structure, and history of a constitution to understand its intended purpose and how it should be applied to specific situations.
Court case: A court case is a dispute between two or more parties that is resolved in a court of law, where a judge or jury examines the evidence to make a decision. The process involves legal arguments, evidence presentation, and may result in a verdict or settlement.
Criminal law: Criminal law is a body of laws and rules that defines conduct prohibited by the government because it threatens and harms public safety and welfare, prescribing punishment to be imposed for such conduct. It governs offenses including murder, theft, and assault, distinguishing them from civil law matters.
Evidence: Evidence is information, facts, or data presented in a legal context to support the truth or falsehood of a claim in court. It can include witness testimony, documents, physical objects, and digital material relevant to the case.
Injunctions: An injunction is a court order that requires a party to do or refrain from doing a specific action. It is a powerful judicial remedy used to prevent or address unlawful conduct, often in cases where monetary damages are insufficient to provide adequate relief.
Issues: In the context of courts and law within political science, issues refer to points of dispute or matter requiring resolution through the judicial system. These are legal questions that arise from facts and circumstances in cases that courts need to address.
Judgment: In the context of political science, particularly within the Courts and Law chapter focusing on how the judiciary takes action, judgment refers to a formal decision or conclusion made by a court following a legal proceeding. It encompasses the outcome of cases, including convictions, acquittals, and legal rulings on matters at hand.
Judicial independence: Judicial independence is the principle that judges should be free to make decisions based on the law and facts without any interference or pressure from the government, politicians, or other outside influences. It ensures that courts can operate impartially, providing fair justice for all.
Judicial Independence: Judicial independence refers to the ability of the judicial branch of government to make decisions free from undue influence or interference from other branches of government or external actors. It is a fundamental principle of democratic societies that ensures the impartial administration of justice and the protection of individual rights and liberties.
Judicial Restraint: Judicial restraint is a judicial philosophy that encourages judges to interpret the law narrowly, deferring to the decisions of the legislative and executive branches of government. It emphasizes that judges should exercise self-discipline and moderation when making rulings, rather than using their position to enact their own personal or political agendas.
Judicial Review: Judicial review is the power of courts to evaluate the constitutionality of legislative acts and executive decisions. This process allows the judiciary to check the other branches of government and ensure that laws and actions align with the constitution, thus protecting individual rights and maintaining a balance of power.
Justiciability: Justiciability refers to the ability of a court to hear and decide a particular case or controversy. It is a fundamental principle that determines whether an issue is appropriate for judicial review and resolution.
Marbury v. Madison: Marbury v. Madison was a landmark 1803 Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review, giving the judicial branch the power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional. This case is a foundational precedent for the role of the judiciary in the American system of government.
Mootness: Mootness is a legal doctrine that refers to a situation where a court case or controversy no longer presents a live, ongoing dispute that can be effectively resolved by the court. When a case becomes moot, the court may dismiss it as there is no longer a practical need for the court to rule on the issue.
Nullification: Nullification is the act by which a state refuses to enforce or adhere to a federal law it views as unconstitutional or damaging to its interests. It posits that states have the right to invalidate any federal action they deem to be an overreach of power.
Obergefell v. Hodges: Obergefell v. Hodges was a landmark 2015 Supreme Court case that legalized same-sex marriage nationwide. The decision held that the Fourteenth Amendment requires all states to license and recognize same-sex marriages, overturning previous state-level bans and establishing marriage equality as a fundamental right.
Ripeness: Ripeness is a key concept in the study of conflict resolution and the judiciary's role in addressing legal disputes. It refers to the idea that a conflict or issue must be sufficiently mature and ready for judicial intervention or resolution before the courts will take action.
Roe v. Wade: Roe v. Wade is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court case that established the constitutional right to abortion in the United States. The decision struck down laws in many states that had previously made abortion illegal, effectively legalizing the procedure nationwide.
Separation of powers: Separation of powers is a principle in political science that divides the responsibilities and powers of a government into distinct branches to prevent any one group or individual from gaining too much control. Typically, these branches are the legislative (makes laws), executive (implements laws), and judicial (interprets laws).
Separation of Powers: Separation of powers is a fundamental principle of government that divides the functions of the state into distinct branches, each with separate duties and areas of responsibility. This principle aims to prevent the concentration of power in a single authority and promote a system of checks and balances between the different branches of government.
Standing: In the context of courts and law, standing is the legal right of an individual or entity to initiate a lawsuit, predicated on their stake in the outcome. It requires demonstrating to the court sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged.
Standing: Standing, in the context of the judiciary, refers to the legal right or capacity of a person or organization to bring a lawsuit or challenge a government action. It determines whether an individual or entity has a sufficient stake or interest in the outcome of a case to justify their involvement in the legal proceedings.
Stare Decisis: Stare decisis is a legal principle that courts should follow precedent established by previous judicial decisions when ruling on similar cases. It is a cornerstone of the common law system, ensuring consistency and predictability in the application of the law.
Statutory Interpretation: Statutory interpretation is the process by which courts analyze and determine the meaning and application of laws enacted by legislative bodies. It involves examining the language, context, and intent behind statutes to understand how they should be applied in specific legal cases.
Writs of Mandamus: A writ of mandamus is a court order compelling a government official or agency to perform a mandatory or non-discretionary duty. It is a powerful judicial tool used to ensure that the executive branch faithfully executes the law.