If we did not have the protection of Constitutional Rights there would be regional pockets of intolerance where the prevailing majorities would pass laws that violate the rights of the minorities. There would be no balance. It is part of human nature for the powerful to take advantage, and control, of the less powerful in order to further their own desires and self interests. If that were to happen we would descend into a quagmire of hodge-podge laws and we would lose the stability and intelligence of the national framework of equality we now experience.
Without a (federal or state) supreme court, there would only be one avenue of appeal, and the case would remain within the territorial jurisdiction of the (for example) District Court and US Court of Appeals Circuit Courts. There would be no way of resolving differences of opinions (Circuit splits) between courts in different Circuits, creating a system of common law in which laws are applied inconsistently. Not only would this create great confusion, it would also result in constitutional due process and equal protection violations that couldn't be resolved.
Each Circuit would apply its own constitutional interpretation, which could vary widely depending on the general ideology of the region.
The Supreme Court effectively operates as a check on the court system, ensuring laws are interpreted and applied (at least somewhat) consistently.
==One Answer== If we did not have the protection of Constitutional Rights there would be regional pockets of intolerance where the prevailing majorities would pass laws that violate the rights of the minorities. There would be no balance. It is part of human nature for the powerful to take advantage, and control, of the less powerful in order to further their own desires and self interests. If that were to happen we would descend into a quagmire of hodge-podge laws and we would lose the stability and intelligence of the national framework of equality we now experience.
No one would write a dissenting opinion.
The correct name is the Supreme Court of the United States, but most people refer to it as the US Supreme Court. Each state has its own Supreme Court, but the US Supreme Court is the end of the line.
Generally, the US Supreme Court will hear a case from US District Court on direct or expedited appeal if:The case is of such national or constitutional importance it would clearly be appealed to and accepted by the Supreme Court anyway; orThe case involves legislation in which Congress specified appeals of District Court decisions must go directly to the Supreme Court (bypassing the Circuit Court).
No the Congress can not nullify a ruling of the Supreme Court. The Congress would have to rewrite the law which the Supreme Court had declared unconstitutional. Then the new law could overrule the Supreme Court IF the new law was declared constitutional if/when appealed.
The US Supreme Court is the highest court in the US. Each state has its own Supreme Court, but the US Supreme Court is the end of the line.
No one would write a dissenting opinion.
David Robinson's Supreme Court happened in 1991.
Elena Kagan Supreme Court nomination happened in 2010.
Sonia Sotomayor Supreme Court nomination happened in 2009.
Depends on the issue. The Supreme Court can send it back to the lower court, not hear it, or they can hear it.
The correct name is the Supreme Court of the United States, but most people refer to it as the US Supreme Court. Each state has its own Supreme Court, but the US Supreme Court is the end of the line.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States.That would be the Supreme Court.
This would be the state supreme court for a particular US state.supreme court
Generally, the US Supreme Court will hear a case from US District Court on direct or expedited appeal if:The case is of such national or constitutional importance it would clearly be appealed to and accepted by the Supreme Court anyway; orThe case involves legislation in which Congress specified appeals of District Court decisions must go directly to the Supreme Court (bypassing the Circuit Court).
The Supreme Court does not use a jury. The Supreme Court is involved in interpretations of the US constitution. A jury would not help.
They were lifted by the Supreme Court in 1965.
1857