The Handy Supreme Court Answer Book. David L HudsonЧитать онлайн книгу.
cases. To accommodate the expanding docket, Congress allowed the Court in 1866 to set its own starting point for its terms. The Court moved its starting time until October. In 1873, Congress formalized this development by passing a law that moved the Court’s term from the first Monday of December to the second Monday in October. It remained there until 1917.
When did the Court originally begin its new terms?
The Judiciary Act of 1789 provided that the Court’s terms shall begin “the first Monday of February” and “the first Monday of August.” The first meeting of the Court occurred on February 2, 1790.
Does the Court ever meet outside of its traditional term time?
Yes, the Court sometimes holds special sessions in important cases. For example, the Court held a special session on July 19, 1942, to hear the case of Ex Parte Quirin to determine whether alleged German saboteurs were entitled to a federal habeas corpus review of their military commission convictions. More recently, the Court called a special session to hear the case of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission in September 2003. The case involved a major First Amendment challenge to the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, a federal law restricting “soft money” spending and other funding restrictions in political elections.
PROCESSES
How is a case brought to the U.S. Supreme Court?
The U.S. Supreme Court has discretionary jurisdiction over the vast majority of cases, at least since 1925 when Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1925. This means that most cases originate in the lower courts and the U.S. Supreme Court does not have to review the lower court’s decision unless it decides to grant certiorari, or review.
In more than 90 percent of the Court’s cases, the party asking the Court to hear the case—the petitioner—petitions the court for review in a document called a petition for writ of certiorari. The opposing party—the respondent—then responds in a document asking the court not to accept the case for review. The Court then decides whether the case is “certworthy,” or acceptable for review.
What determines if the U.S. Supreme Court will hear a case?
The Supreme Court has discretionary jurisdiction, which means that in the vast majority of cases the Court has discretion whether or not it will hear a particular case. The Court only hears eighty out of eight thousand cases each term so the chances for review in any particular case are extremely small.
However, the Court has provided “consideration” for cases that it might take in Rule 10 of its Supreme Court Rules.
CourtSpeak: Rule 10 of the Rules of the Supreme Court
Considerations governing review on writ of certiorari: “Review on a writ of certiorari is not a matter of right, but of judicial discretion. A petition for a writ of certiorari will be granted only for compelling reasons. The following, although neither controlling nor fully measuring the Court’s discretion, indicate the character of the reasons the Court considers:
(a) a United States court of appeals has entered a decision in conflict with the decision of another United States court of appeals on the same important matter; has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with a decision by a state court of last resort; or has so far departed from the accepted and usual course of judicial proceedings, or sanctioned such a departure by a lower court, as to call for an exercise of this Court’s supervisory power;
(b) a state court of last resort has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with the decision of another state court of last resort or of a United States court of appeals;
(c) a state court or a United States court of appeals has decided an important question of federal law that has not been, but should be, settled by this Court, or has decided an important federal question in a way that conflicts with relevant decisions of this Court.
A petition for a writ of certiorari is rarely granted when the asserted error consists of erroneous factual findings or the misapplication of a properly stated rule of law.”
What is the importance of circuit splits?
Even experienced Court observers warn there is no way to predict with great accuracy when the U.S. Supreme Court will agree to hear a case. However, one of the best predictors is when a case presents an issue that divides the lower federal appeals courts. This is called a circuit split. Rule 10(a) of the Rules of the Supreme Court identifies as an important consideration when a federal appeals court decision conflicts with another federal appeals court decision.
For example, in 2005 the U.S. Supreme Court heard the case of Cutter v. Wilkinson to determine the constitutionality of a federal law called the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA). The high court agreed to hear this case in part because the Sixth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled the act violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Several other circuits, including the Fourth, Seventh, and Ninth, had ruled that RLUIPA did not violate the Establishment Clause. The U.S. Supreme Court took the case to resolve the circuit split on the constitutionality of this federal law, which it did by upholding the law.
CourtSpeak: The Discuss List
On September 27, 2001, in a lecture at the University of Guanajuato in Mexico, Chief Justice William Rehnquist spoke about the Court’s discuss list: “Shortly before each conference, I send out a list of the petitions to be decided during that conference that I want to discuss. Each of the other Justices may ask to have additional cases put on the ‘discuss list.’ If at any particular conference there are 100 petitions to be decided, there may be anywhere from 15 to 30 that are on the discuss list. The petitions for certiorari that are not discussed are denied without any recorded vote.”
What are circuit assignments?
Sometimes litigants will seek an immediate stay of a lower court ruling before a particular Supreme Court justice. The circuits are divided among the nine justices for them to consider these emergency applications. As of February 1, 2006, the circuit assignments for the current Court are:
| Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. | District of Columbia, Federal and Fourth Circuits |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Sixth and Seventh Circuits |
| Justice Antonin Scalia | Fifth Circuit |
| Justice Anthony Kennedy | Ninth Circuit |
| Justice David Souter | First and Third Circuits |
| Justice Clarence Thomas | Eleventh Circuit |
| Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg | Second Circuit |
| Justice Stephen Breyer | Tenth Circuit |
| Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. | Eighth Circuit |
What is the discuss list?
The discuss list refers to a group of cases that the justices, primarily the chief justice, determine are cases worthy of discussion in the Court’s conference meetings, which are held on Wednesdays and Fridays. If a case makes the “discuss list,” it has a far better chance of being accepted for review.
What is the rule of four?
The rule