Supreme Court Jurisdictions and Federal Judicial Appointments

2 Types of Supreme Court Jurisdictions

1. Appellate Jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction covers cases from federal courts and the highest state courts involving federal questions (interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, statutes, or treaties). This process is discretionary, not obligatory, and follows the Rule of Four.

2. Original Jurisdiction

Between 1789 and 2012, there were only about 200 original jurisdiction cases. Under Article III, these include:

• Cases between a state and the U.S. Government.
• Cases between two or more states.
• Cases involving foreign ambassadors, ministers, or consuls.
• Cases initiated by a state against a citizen of another state or a foreign country.

Note: The 11th Amendment (1795) requires suits initiated against a state by a citizen of another state or a foreign country to begin in the courts of that state.

Current Status

Today, only controversies between states qualify exclusively as original cases in the Supreme Court. The Court maintains concurrent original jurisdiction with U.S. District Courts for the other three categories.

Politics of Appointing Federal Judges

The appointment process is influenced by several key factors:

• Judges likely to agree with the President.
• Judges from the President’s party (90% historical average, excluding Taft, Hoover, and Ford).
• Senatorial courtesy.
• White House staff and Department of Justice input.
• Non-governmental actors (e.g., American Bar Association).
• Interest groups (Liberal: People for the American Way, Alliance for Justice; Conservative: Heritage Foundation, Judicial Selection Monitoring Project).
• Senate Advice and Consent.
• Judicial Philosophy: Judicial Activism (not explicitly stated in the Constitution) vs. Judicial Restraint (adherence to the letter of the Constitution).

5 Considerations by Presidents

1. Professional qualifications.
2. Acceptability to the Senate.
3. Ideological fit.
4. Personal friendship.
5. Demographic factors (region, race, religion, gender).

When Appointments Are Not the 'Right Fit'

Historically, some appointees have diverged from the expectations of the Presidents who appointed them:

• Earl Warren (1953-1969): Appointed by Eisenhower; proved more liberal than expected.
• Harry Blackmun (1970-1994): Appointed by Nixon; authored the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision.
• Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy, and David Souter: Appointed by Reagan and George H.W. Bush; frequently voted against administration positions on issues like school prayer.