William_T._Bianco,_David_T._Canon]_American_Polit

494 Chapter 14Chapter 14 || The CourtsThe Courts

statute may be unclear and the Court must interpret how to apply the law. For example,

should the protection of endangered species prevent economic development that may

destroy the species’ habitat? How does one determine if an employer is responsible

for punishing sexual harassment in the workplace? How should the voting rights of

minorities be protected? In each case, the Court must interpret the relevant statutes to

determine what Congress really meant. In addition, in the third main area of the law—

administrative law—the Court is sometimes required to assess how federal agencies

have interpreted and implemented laws passed by Congress. Often this involves the

controversial practice of consulting legislative histories—floor debates, congressional

hearings, and so on—to determine how the legislature intended for the laws to be

interpreted. But the late justice Antonin Scalia argued that such searches are inherently

subjective and that justices should only interpret the actual text of the laws in question.

Although politicians and other political actors accept judicial review as a central

part of the political system, critics are concerned about its antidemocratic nature. Why,

for example, do we give nine unelected justices such extraordinary power over our

elected representatives? Debates about the proper role for the Court will continue as

long as it is involved in controversial decisions. We will take up this question later in the

chapter when we address the concepts of judicial activism and judicial restraint.

“Why

Should

I Care?”

Judicial review may seem like “inside baseball” that doesn’t really matter for most

Americans. However, the power to strike down laws and government actions means that

the Court may act against political majorities to strike down unconstitutional actions such

as segregating schools by race and discriminating against same-sex marriage. Judicial

review may also be used, however, to frustrate popular majorities during times of political

change, such as during the New Deal of the 1930s. In the most recent term, the Court

did some of both—requiring the government to have a court order to search cell phone

records but also deciding that states must collect sales taxes on Internet sales, despite

public opposition to the practice. In either case, this is an awesome political power that puts

the Supreme Court on an equal institutional footing with Congress and the president.

The American Legal and Judicial System

Two sets of considerations are necessary to understand the overall nature of our

judicial system: the fundamentals of the legal system that apply to all courts in the

United States, and the structure of the court system within our system of federalism.

You may have a pretty good understanding of the legal system from watching Law and

Order, but a refresher on the basics never hurts.

Court Fundamentals

The general characteristics of the court system begin with the people who are in the

courtroom. The plaintiff brings the case, and the defendant is the person or party

who is being sued or charged with a crime. If the case is appealed, the petitioner is the

OUTLINE THE STRUCTURE

OF THE COURT SYSTEM

plaintiff

The person or party who brings a case

to court.

defendant

The person or party against whom a

case is brought.

Full_15_APT_64431_ch14_488-529.indd 494 16/11/18 1:44 PM