 Identify the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

o Ex appellate vs original jurisdiction

Original jurisdiction means that the court has the right to hear the case first. Appellate
jurisdiction means that the court hears an appeal from a court of original jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction
When a court in the United States hears a case, it is exercising one of two main types of jurisdiction.
These are appellate jurisdiction and original jurisdiction. This determines not only what court
will hear the case, but also what kind of decision it can issue. This lesson will explain the difference
between these two types of cases.
Jurisdiction is spelled out in law and the constitution; its main function is to decide which courts
have the power to hear which types of cases. Federal courts, such as United States district courts,
courts of appeals (circuit courts), and the United States Supreme Court, have the power to hear
cases involving federal law and the United States constitution.
State courts have the power to hear cases involving state law and state constitution, respectively.
Each state has its own court system and its own division of original and appellate jurisdiction
(within state law).
There is also a type of jurisdiction called diversity jurisdiction, in which a plaintiff might decide
which court to bring their case to because multiple courts have the authority to exercise original
jurisdiction over it.
An example of this might be a case involving both foreign and U.S. citizens. Even though the issue
of the case might involve state law, the parties can decide to have it heard in a federal court instead.
Another example is a case involving residents of different states.

Original Jurisdiction
When a court exercises original jurisdiction, it means that it is the first court to hear that case. This
is usually a district court, which hears most criminal and civil trials. Federal district courts are the
first courts to hear cases involving claims under federal law, including the United States
constitution.

In rare cases, such as those in which foreign ambassadors are a party, cases in which one state
sues another, or when a citizen sues their own state, the U.S. Supreme Court may decide to hear
the case.

Because a court exercising original jurisdiction is the first court to hear the case, it has to decide
both the facts of the case (such as whether or not a defendant is guilty) as well as the appropriate
legal standards to apply to those facts (such as whether a guilty defendant's sentence was
appropriate under the law). If an appellate court decides that the court of first instance applied the
law incorrectly, it can change the original court's ruling.
In addition to federal district courts, other courts that can exercise original jurisdiction include:
family courts, bankruptcy courts, juvenile courts, admiralty courts, traffic courts, state district
courts, state superior courts, and state supreme courts.

The United States Supreme Court building. This is where the Supreme Court
exercises its jurisdiction.

Original Jurisdiction Example

An example of original jurisdiction is a federal criminal trial. If a defendant is charged with a crime
under federal law, the appropriate court for that trial is a federal district court. A state court would
not have jurisdiction to hear the case, because a state court only has jurisdiction over state law.
Because the federal district court is the first court to hear the case, it is exercising original
jurisdiction.

For another example, a bankruptcy court would not hear the case of whether or not a defendant is
guilty of a traffic violation, because that issue is outside of that court's jurisdiction. Oftentimes
questions of jurisdiction are not so clear-cut, however.

Finally, perhaps the most famous example of a case involving original jurisdiction is the Supreme
Court case of Marbury v. Madison. In 1803, William Marbury was granted a judgeship by the
outgoing President, John Adams. However, the paperwork formalizing this appointment was not
delivered before President Adams left office.
After the change of presidential administrations, the new Secretary of State, James Madison,
decided not to deliver the paperwork at all. Marbury sued Madison under the terms of the Judiciary
Act of 1801, and the case was heard by the United States Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled that because the Judiciary Act had attempted to establish original
jurisdiction for the Supreme Court beyond what was prescribed by Article III of the U.S.
Constitution, the Judiciary Act was unconstitutional. Because the court ruled that it lacked original
jurisdiction to hear the case, Marbury was never made a judge.

Appellate Jurisdiction
When a court exercises appellate jurisdiction, it means that it is reviewing the decision of another
court. Usually, this is exercised by a U.S. Court of Appeals, or in special cases, the U.S. Supreme
Court. In some cases, such as appeals from state supreme courts involving federal law, a district
court will exercise appellate jurisdiction.

When a court is exercising appellate jurisdiction, it typically is not deciding questions of fact, such
as whether or not a defendant is guilty. Instead, it is deciding whether the law was correctly applied
in any given case.

In the federal court system, the circuit courts and the Supreme Court generally exercise appellate
jurisdiction. Because they primarily review the decisions of other courts, they hear a smaller
number of cases. The circuit courts review the cases of U.S. district courts, while the Supreme
Court reviews appeals from the decisions of the circuit courts. The Supreme Court would not
typically hear an appeal of a decision issued by a district court without the case first being heard by
the appropriate circuit court.

In addition to federal circuit courts, other courts that can exercise appellate jurisdiction include: the
U.S. Supreme Court, federal district courts, state supreme courts, and state circuit courts.

Identify the criteria the Supreme Court generally uses to determine if they will take a case

The Justices use the "Rule of Four” to decide if they will take the case. If four of the nine
Justices feel the case has value, they will issue a writ of certiorari. This is a legal order from
the high court for the lower court to send the records of the case to them for review.

 What general types of cases will SCOTUS decide to hear?

Typically, the Court hears cases that have been decided in either an appropriate
U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest Court in a given state (if the state court
decided a Constitutional issue). The Supreme Court has its own set of rules.
According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.
  What kind of cases will SCOTUS reject?

The Court is likely to deny review if the lower court also ruled against the party on an
alternative ground, if there is doubt about the Court's jurisdiction to decide the
question, or if the Court would have to resolve some other difficult factual or legal
question in order to decide the question presented.

 How does SCOTUS make the decision to hear a case?

 Americans may have heard the expression “take it all the way to the Supreme Court.”
That simple phrase conveys two important facts: A Supreme Court hearing is the
final stop for a court case; and a case that appears before the justices has traveled a
long road.
 Most cases don’t make it all the way to the Supreme Court. Every year from 2012 to
2019, the court received an average of 7,000 to 8,000 petitions for a hearing. Each
year, the court has agreed to hear only about 80 of those cases.

 80 is the average number of cases the Supreme Court agrees

to hear each year—out of 7,000 to 8,000 petitions
 Why? The Supreme Court simply cannot grant a hearing to all the cases it receives.
One reason is time. The court operates only nine months out of the year and has
other business to attend to beyond reviewing and hearing new cases.
 Another reason is merit. Not every petition is appropriate for the Supreme Court to
accept. The U.S. Constitution specifies certain kinds of cases the Supreme Court has
the power to consider and rule on, including cases that relate to treaties, diplomats
and disputes between states.
 In most situations, though, petitioners want the court’s nine justices to reconsider a
case that has already been decided in a lower court. The federal government
currently has 94 district courts and 13 circuit courts, as well as Bankruptcy Court and
the Court of International Trade. In addition, every state has a network of courts.
The petitioners hope the Supreme Court justices will then invite counsel from both
sides to Washington, D.C., to make their arguments so the court can settle the issue
once and for all.
 The cases that do appear before the high court typically have some unique features.
 The lower courts may have disagreed on an issue. In situations in which one court
has ruled one way and another court has ruled another, the Supreme Court justices
may choose to intervene and clarify the law.
 The court also hears cases that answer important constitutional questions, like the
extent of state powers. It also looks for cases that will affect the whole nation, such
as ones dealing with an individual’s right to expression and the freedom of the press
to operate.
 Thousands of petitions for hearings roll in through the court’s electronic filing
system, by mail, or in person. The justices’ clerks, top legal positions usually held by
recent law school graduates, write a summary of each petition, along with a
recommendation about what the court should do about it. On Wednesdays and
 Fridays, the justices gather in a private conference to make a decision. If at least four
of the nine justices vote in favor of accepting it, the court will hear the case.
 If the justices decline to hear a case, only they know why. They never comment on
why they have declined a petition. Elder Witt, coauthor of The Supreme Court and the
Powers of the American Government, notes, “The thing about the Supreme Court that I
caution — I would always caution anyone about — is, with a few exceptions, it’s hard
to read their minds.”
 Whatever the reason, the thousands of people whose cases are declined by the court
every year must accept the decision made in the lower courts.
 The cases that are heard by the Supreme Court, however, leave an indelible mark in
our country’s history, and in many instances clarify Americans’ rights, privileges, and
responsibilities.

 Note that this slide is not asking how they chose a case but what they look for in
determining if they will hear the case.

Explain how cases are argued at the Supreme Court

The Court holds oral argument in about 70-80 cases each year. The arguments are an
opportunity for the Justices to ask questions directly of the attorneys representing the
parties to the case, and for the attorneys to highlight arguments that they view as
particularly important.
Most common—roughly two-thirds of the total—are requests for review of decisions
of federal appellate or district courts. The great majority of cases reach the Supreme
Court through its granting of petitions for writs of certiorari, from the Latin certiorari
volumnus, “we wish to be informed.”

What happens at a hearing?

At hearings, the court relies on written declarations and your arguments. Hearings can
determine temporary, agreed, or some procedural matters. The trial is where you give
evidence and arguments for the judge to use in making a final decision.
  When do hearings happen?

https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/
activity-resources/supreme-1#:~:text=Oral%20Arguments,-By%20law%2C%20the&text=The%20Court%20is
%2C%20typically%2C%20in,two%20weeks%20of%20each%20month.

 Who attends?

Oral arguments are open to the public.

 How is the case argued before The Court?

The Court will hear all scheduled oral arguments for the upcoming term in the Courtroom.
Seating for the oral argument sessions will be provided to the public, members of the Supreme
Court bar, and press, and Courtroom bar admissions will resume. Masking in the Courtroom for
oral arguments will be optional. The Court will provide a live audio feed of all scheduled oral
arguments for the upcoming term. A link to the live audio feed will be available on the homepage
of the Court's website. The oral argument audio and a transcript of the oral arguments will be
posted on the Court's website following oral argument each day.
The building will otherwise be closed to the public until further notice.

Explain the different types of Supreme Court decisions and why they're important

decisionType=1: Cases the Court decides by a signed opinion. Note that for the 1946 terms to present, decisionType=1
cases are those that the Court decided by a signed opinion and in which it heard oral arguments. This is true for the
1791-1945 terms too. When both these conditions are met, the case is coded as decisionType=1. But the second
condition—oral argument—is no longer necessary for a decisionType=1 classification. That's because the dates of oral
argument were not reported for many cases that were likely argued (if only because the reporter noted, "After
argument…"). We are working to locate these (many) missing dates and would appreciate any leads from users.
Jettisoning the oral argument requirement also means that there are many cases that were probably not orally argued but
that are included as decisionType=1 cases because a justice is listed as delivering the opinion of the Court. For users
that want to examine cases we know for sure were orally argued, we suggest selecting on dateArgument—with the
important caveat that you will miss cases that were likely argued but are lacking a date.

decisionType=2: Cases decided with an opinion but without hearing oral argument; i.e., per curiam opinions. In the legacy
data, decisionType2 cases include cases in which the Court (or reporter) did not use the term "per curiam" but rather
"The Court [said]," "By the Court," or "By direction of the Court." If these cases identify the author of the opinion, we code
an opinion writer.

decisionType=4: Decrees. This infrequent type of decision usually arises under the Court's original jurisdiction and
involves state boundary disputes. The justices will typically appoint a special master to take testimony and render a
report, the bulk of which generally becomes the Court's decision. The presence of the label, "decree," distinguishes this
type of decision from the others.

decisionType=5: Cases decided by an equally divided vote. When a justice fails to participate in a case or when the Court
has a vacancy, the participating justices may cast a tie vote. In such cases, the Reports merely state that "the judgment is
affirmed by an equally divided vote" and the name of any nonparticipating justice(s). Their effect is to uphold the decision
of the court whose decision the Supreme Court reviewed.

decisionType=6: This decision type is a variant of decisionType=1 cases. It differs from type 1 in that no individual
justice's name appears as author of the Court's opinion. Instead, these unsigned orally argued cases are labeled as
decided "per curiam." The difference between this type and decisionType=2 is the occurrence of oral argument in the
former but not the latter. In both types the opinion of the Court is unsigned.

decisionType=7: Judgments of the Court. This decision type is also a variant of the formally decided cases. It differs from
type 1 in that less than a majority of the participating justices agree with the opinion produced by the justice assigned to
write the Court's opinion. Except for those interested only in the authors of the opinions of the Court, decisionType=7
should be included in analyses of the Court's formally decided cases. See also the notes under decisionType=1.

The database does not contain all of the non-orally argued per curiam decisions (decisionType=2). The Reports contain
large numbers of brief, non-orally argued per curiam decisions. The database includes only those for which the Court has
provided a summary, as well as those without a summary in which one or more of the justices wrote an opinion.

Along similar lines, the database also does not contain memorandum decisions or "back-of-the-book" U.S. Reports cases
with the exceptions of, first, volumes 131 and 154. In these volumes, the reporters included (in the Appendices) cases
previously omitted or "not hitherto reported in full." Second, we are trying to include all orally argued cases in the back-of-
the-book (the Database already contains "front-of-the-book" orally argued cases). All decisionType=5 orally argued
cases, even if in the back of the book, already have been entered. We are in the process of adding decisionType=6 back-
of-the-book cases. In the vast majority of these, the Court dismissed the case with a one-line sentence.
 
Values:

1 opinion of the court (orally argued)

2 per curiam (no oral argument)

4 decrees

5 equally divided vote

6 per curiam (orally argued)

7 judgment of the Court (orally argued)

8 seriatim

Why is a Supreme Court decision so important?

First, as the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for
justice. Second, due to its power of judicial review, it plays an essential role in
ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power.
 Ex. majority, dissent, concurrence 

Concurrences explain the appellate judge's vote and may discuss parts of the decision in which the
appellate judge had a different rationale. “Dissenting opinion,” or dissent, is the separate judicial
opinion of an appellate judge who disagreed with the majority's decision explaining the
disagreement.


o
 What is the point of writing a dissent or concurrence?

First and foremost, a dissenting opinion memorializes the reasons for the dissenter's
disagreement with the majority opinion. The source of the disagreement may rest on
additional facts or relevant law omitted from the majority opinion, or both.