Supreme Court of the United States Procedures: Crash Course Government and Politics #20

CrashCourse
12 Jun 201506:53
EducationalLearning
32 Likes 10 Comments

TLDRThe video script offers an insightful look into the workings of the United States Supreme Court. It explains the process of bringing a case to the Supreme Court, starting with the need for a case or controversy and the requirement for it to have been previously decided by a lower court. The script delves into the petition for a writ of certiorari, the 'cert pool', and the 'rule of 4', which are pivotal in deciding which cases the court will hear. It also outlines the importance of written legal arguments known as 'briefs', the role of 'amicus curiae' briefs, and the oral argument process. The summary highlights the decision-making process, including the majority opinion, the significance of the 'holding', and the impact of concurring and dissenting opinions on legal precedent. The video concludes by emphasizing the numerous challenges in getting a case decided by the Supreme Court and the binding nature of the majority opinion on lower courts.

Takeaways
  • 🏛️ The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) hears cases that have been through lower courts and have been appealed, unless there is original jurisdiction.
  • 📄 To get a case to the Supreme Court, a petition for a writ of certiorari must be filed, which is not guaranteed to be accepted.
  • 🕵️‍♂️ The Solicitor General acts as a 'bouncer', screening out many petitions that don't raise significant federal law questions.
  • 🔍 If a petition is granted, it enters the 'cert pool', the first round where justices decide which cases to decide.
  • ✋ The 'rule of 4' means that four justices must agree to hear a case for it to proceed to the court.
  • 📰 Both the petitioner and respondent submit written legal arguments known as 'briefs', with the petitioner also filing a reply.
  • 👥 Non-parties with an interest in the case can file amicus curiae (friend of the court) briefs, which can influence justices.
  • ⏳ After briefs are filed, oral arguments are scheduled, where each side gets 30 minutes including time for justices' questions.
  • 📊 A decision requires a majority (5 out of 9 justices) to agree on at least one legal argument, which can affirm or overturn the lower court's decision.
  • 📝 The Chief Justice assigns the task of writing the court's decision, known as the majority opinion, which is binding on lower courts.
  • 🤔 Justices who agree with the decision but for different reasons can write concurring opinions, which are not binding on lower courts.
  • 😕 Dissenting opinions are written by justices who disagree with the majority and do not set precedent but can influence future decisions.
Q & A

  • What is the first requirement for a case to be taken to the Supreme Court?

    -The first requirement is that there must be a case or controversy, and except in rare situations where the court has original jurisdiction, the case must have already been heard and decided by a lower court and appealed.

  • What is a 'writ of certiorari' in the context of the Supreme Court?

    -A writ of certiorari is a formal request that the Supreme Court hear a case. It is also referred to as 'the cert' and is used when a party has exhausted all appeals in lower courts but still believes their issue is worthy of the Supreme Court's attention.

  • What is the role of the solicitor general in the process of the Supreme Court choosing its cases?

    -The solicitor general acts as a screener for many petitions, deciding which cases raise significant federal law questions and are thus worthy of the court's attention, similar to a bouncer at an exclusive club.

  • What is the 'cert pool' and how does it relate to the Supreme Court's case selection process?

    -The cert pool is the first round in which the justices decide which cases they are actually going to decide from the list of petitions granted. It is part of the process that follows the granting of a writ of certiorari.

  • What is the 'rule of 4' in the context of the Supreme Court?

    -The rule of 4 states that for the judges to actually hear a case, called granting certiorari, 4 of the 9 justices have to agree to hear it.

  • What are 'briefs' in the legal context of the Supreme Court?

    -Briefs are written legal arguments from each side explaining why the law favors their position. They are submitted by the petitioner (the party seeking to overturn the lower court decision) and the respondent (the party wanting the court to uphold the lower court's decision).

  • What is an 'amicus curiae' or friend of the court brief?

    -An amicus curiae brief is filed by individuals or groups who are not parties to the case but have an interest in the outcome. These briefs often contain different legal, economic, or historical arguments that can influence the justices.

  • How much time is allocated for each side during oral arguments in the Supreme Court?

    -Each side gets half an hour to make its case during oral arguments. This time includes questions from the justices.

  • What is the minimum number of justices that must agree on a legal argument for the court to render an official decision?

    -A majority, which means at least 5 of the 9 justices, must agree on at least one of the legal arguments to render an official decision.

  • What is the term used to describe the decision of the court to either affirm or overturn the lower court's ruling?

    -The decision of the court to either affirm or overturn the lower court's ruling is called 'the holding'.

  • What is the difference between a 'concurring opinion' and a 'dissenting opinion'?

    -A concurring opinion is written by a justice who agrees with the holding in the majority opinion but for different legal reasons. A dissenting opinion is written by judges on the losing side who did not support the majority decision. While a dissent does not set a precedent for lower courts, it can provide arguments that might persuade later courts in similar decisions.

  • What is the significance of the 'holding' and 'rationale' in a Supreme Court decision?

    -The holding is the decision to affirm or overturn the lower court's ruling and is the first thing one needs to know in any Supreme Court decision. The rationale is the legal reasoning behind the holding. Only the holding and the rationale supported by at least 5 of the 9 justices become binding precedent for lower courts.

Outlines
00:00
🏛 Understanding the Supreme Court Process

The first paragraph introduces the topic of how the Supreme Court of the United States operates. Craig, the host, humorously declines to use the nickname S.C.O.T.U.S, opting for 'supreme cocoa' or 'cocoa supreme' instead. The discussion focuses on the procedural aspects required to bring a case to the Supreme Court. It outlines the necessity of having a case or controversy that has been previously decided by a lower court and the process of appealing until reaching the Supreme Court. The concept of a writ of certiorari, or 'the cert,' is introduced as the petition for the Supreme Court to hear a case. The selection process for cases is described, involving the solicitor general screening petitions and the 'cert pool' where justices decide which cases to hear, governed by the rule of 4. The process continues with the submission of briefs by both the petitioner and respondent, and the possibility of amicus curiae briefs from interested parties. The paragraph concludes with the anticipation of oral arguments and the subsequent decision-making process by the Supreme Court.

05:01
🗣️ The Dynamics of Decision-Making in the Supreme Court

The second paragraph delves into the decision-making dynamics of the Supreme Court. It emphasizes the rarity of unanimous decisions and the common occurrence of 5 to 4 margins in ideologically divided courts. The paragraph explains the role of dissenting opinions, written by justices who disagree with the majority, and their potential influence on future cases despite lacking legal force. The importance of understanding not just the procedural aspects, but also the ideological and legal reasoning behind judicial decisions is highlighted. The host reminds viewers of the high barriers to getting a case heard and the significance of the majority opinion's holding and rationale as binding precedent for lower courts. The paragraph concludes with a teaser for a future episode that will explore the thought processes behind judicial decisions.

Mindmap
Keywords
💡Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the U.S. federal judiciary and has the final say on matters of federal law. In the video, it is the central focus as the host explains how cases make their way to and are decided by this court, which is integral to the theme of understanding the judicial process in the U.S.
💡Case or Controversy
A 'case or controversy' is a legal dispute that must exist in order for the Supreme Court to have the authority to hear a case. It is a fundamental requirement derived from Article III of the U.S. Constitution. In the script, it is mentioned as the first prerequisite for taking a case to the Supreme Court.
💡Writ of Certiorari
A 'writ of certiorari' is a type of writ seeking judicial review, and it is used to request that the Supreme Court review a lower court's decision. The script uses the colloquial term 'the cert' to refer to this petition, highlighting the process by which a case can be brought before the Supreme Court after lower court appeals have been exhausted.
💡Solicitor General
The Solicitor General is the head attorney for the U.S. government and plays a significant role in the Supreme Court's case selection process. The script humorously likens the Solicitor General to a 'bouncer at a hot club', emphasizing their role in screening and filtering the many petitions for certiorari.
💡Rule of 4
The 'Rule of 4' is a procedural rule in the Supreme Court where at least four justices must agree to hear a case after a petition for a writ of certiorari has been filed. This rule is crucial for understanding how cases move forward in the Supreme Court, as illustrated in the video.
💡Briefs
In legal context, 'briefs' are written documents that state the facts of a case and argue the law that applies. They are a key part of the Supreme Court's process, where both the petitioner and respondent submit briefs outlining their respective legal arguments. The video clarifies that 'briefs' are not underwear, using humor to underscore the importance of these legal documents.
💡Amicus Curiae Briefs
Amicus curiae briefs, often referred to as 'friend of the court' briefs, are submissions from individuals or groups not directly involved in the case but with a strong interest in the outcome. These briefs can influence the court by providing additional legal, economic, or historical perspectives. The video highlights their role in allowing interest groups to participate in the judicial process.
💡Oral Arguments
Oral arguments are the verbal presentations made by the attorneys of both sides in a case before the Supreme Court. Each side typically gets half an hour to present their case, including time for answering questions from the justices. The video uses the analogy of an intense teacher questioning to illustrate the rigorous nature of this part of the process.
💡Majority Opinion
A 'majority opinion' is the written decision of the Supreme Court in which at least five justices agree on the legal reasoning that supports the court's judgment. The video explains that the chief justice assigns the task of writing the majority opinion, which is a critical component of the court's decision-making process.
💡Concurring and Dissenting Opinions
Concurring and dissenting opinions are additional written opinions by justices who agree or disagree, respectively, with the majority opinion's decision. A concurring opinion agrees with the outcome but offers different legal reasoning, while a dissenting opinion disagrees with the outcome. The video points out that while these opinions may not be binding, they can be influential and provide arguments for future cases.
💡Precedent
Precedent refers to a principle or rule established in a previous legal case that is either binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent cases with similar issues. The video emphasizes that only the holding and the rationale supported by at least five justices become binding precedent for lower courts, which is a fundamental concept in understanding the impact of Supreme Court decisions.
Highlights

The Supreme Court of the United States (referred to as the supreme cocoa or cocoa supreme) is the focus of the discussion.

To bring a case to the Supreme Court, there must be a case or controversy that has been previously decided by a lower court.

The court has original jurisdiction in rare situations, but typically hears cases on appeal.

Petitioning for a writ of certiorari, also known as 'the cert', is how a case is brought before the court if it has exhausted all lower appeals.

The solicitor general acts as a gatekeeper, screening out many petitions that do not raise significant federal law questions.

If a petition is granted, it enters the cert pool, the first round of case selection by the justices.

The rule of 4 dictates that four justices must agree to hear a case for it to proceed to the discussion list.

Briefs are legal arguments submitted by the parties involved in the case, with the petitioner seeking to overturn and the respondent aiming to uphold the lower court's decision.

Amicus curiae or friend of the court briefs can be filed by individuals or groups interested in the case outcome, potentially influencing justices' decisions.

Oral arguments are scheduled, with each side given half an hour to present, including time for questions from the justices.

A decision requires a majority of five justices to agree on at least one legal argument, which can either affirm or overturn the lower court's decision.

The chief justice assigns the task of writing the majority opinion, which becomes the court's decision.

The holding, or the decision to affirm or overturn a lower court's ruling, is the first thing to know in any Supreme Court decision.

Concurring opinions agree with the holding but offer different legal reasoning, which is not binding on lower courts.

Dissenting opinions, written by justices who disagree with the majority, do not set legal precedent but can influence future court decisions.

Most certiorari petitions do not make it past the initial screening, and only a small fraction are granted.

The holding and its rationale supported by at least five justices become binding precedent for lower courts.

Dissents and concurrences, while not legally binding, can contain important legal ideas and be of interest to readers.

Transcripts

Browse More Related Video

Supreme Court Ethics: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (HBO)

AP Government UNIT 1 REVIEW [Everything You NEED to Know!]

Donald Trump and The Supreme Court | Uncommon Knowledge

Is Web Scraping Legal? (Legal Analysis)

AP Gov Review: Final Exam Review!

Statistics in the Courts: Crash Course Statistics #40

Rate This

5.0 / 5 (0 votes)

Thanks for rating:

Related Tags
Supreme CourtLegal ProcedureCertiorariAmicus BriefsOral ArgumentsJudicial DecisionsConstitutional LawCourt ProcessGovernment SeriesEducational ContentCrash Course