How a case gets to the US Supreme Court
Vložit
- čas přidán 27. 03. 2017
- The only way is by surviving "the rule of four".
Subscribe to our channel! goo.gl/0bsAjO
Vox.com is a news website that helps you cut through the noise and understand what's really driving the events in the headlines. Check out www.vox.com to get up to speed on everything from Kurdistan to the Kim Kardashian app.
Most often, the US Supreme Court grants or denies petitions to hear a case after reviewing a written request called a "petition for writ of certiorari". Also called "the writ of cert", it is reviewed by the Justices and granting the petition depends on whether or not it passes "the rule of four". If it does, the case is probably one of three types: a case of national importance, a case in which a lower court decision has invalidated federal law, or a case involving a split decision in lower courts. Famously, Bush v. Gore was an example of national importance, Gonzales v. Raich was a case in which a lower court invalidated federal law, and Obergefell v. Hodges was selected by the Court in order to resolve a circuit split decision. By following this protocol of case selection, the Court has been designed to be reactive to legislative decisions made in other branches of government, as opposed to an active legislative body that seeks to create and institute new laws. Overall, the result of this design is a Court that prioritizes case selections that will enable them to enforce the uniformity of federal law throughout the country.
Check out our full video catalog: goo.gl/IZONyE
Follow Vox on Twitter: goo.gl/XFrZ5H
Or on Facebook: goo.gl/U2g06o
Speeding ticket to the Supreme Court? Wow
Well there could be reasons, like they were ticketed on private land or native land, the judge or the appeals judge might issue an option that has issues national on jurisdiction.
But most of this is settled law, if the Trial judge did something... interesting, it would more that likely the circuit court would correct it and the supreme court would not choose to hear it.
5 seconds later they were showing a guy being held in a bamboo cage... so how serious is this bit really supposed to be?
That bamboo cage clip was from a sitcom from 1964, _Gilligan's Island_ about the comic adventures of seven castaways as they attempted to survive the island on which they had been shipwrecked.
+RaymondHng If you're so smart, then why could the professor make a coconut radio but he couldn't design a damn boat to get them off the island?
Where did say I was smart? I did not write or produce this sitcom. I'm only telling you what I know from memory of a television sitcom that I have not watched since the '60s. You are attacking the messenger.
Despite their obvious skill and inventiveness, the castaways never quite manage to put together a functional raft out of bamboo (or repair the holes in the Minnow, though the entire ship fell apart in the eighth episode). In the television movie _Rescue from Gilligan's Island_, the castaways tie all their huts together and use that as a raft for escape.
The coolest thing about this video is the fact about the basketball court
lol..u deserve the like
Taunt Warrior what did he mean by the basket ball
There's a literal basketball court inside the supreme court. The basketball court is on the highest level.
There’s also a baseball field and soccer field inside Capitol Hill.
😂 I gave you a like
I knew Supreme made shirts and stuff. Didn't know they had a court
Took me a while to realize your name has “ •17 years ago “
In Australia it's
Magistrates Court -> District Court -> Supreme Court -> Court Of Appeal -> High Court
@@fanmatrkhan271 supreme court sounds higher than high court though
@@melviness4769 It's not the Supreme Court of all of Australia though, the guy didn't clarify that those are State Supreme Courts eg. The Supreme Court of Victoria
It's not just a court, it's the S U P R E M E court
like S U P R E M E pizza.
and like S U P R E M E dogs
I fw the vision 🤘🔥🙌🙏🔥👌👌🔌🔌👉👌
S U P R E M E leader Kim Jong un
Martijn Mols I FW THE CONSTITUTION
I know someone who actually believes that the Supreme Court is some sort of food buffet.
She's 17.
So she’s 19 now, any smarter?
Collin The Milkman oop
What if there is a food court named Supreme Court...then she is not wrong. Words and names have many meanings.
Bryan I think most people would recognize and understand “Supreme Court” as SCOTUS
And she probably thinks biden woukd be better than trump 😂😂😂😂😂
In Australia it's
Magistrates Court -> District Court -> Supreme Court -> Court Of Appeal -> High Court
no one asked
does a question always have to be explicit? That's still a reasonable contribution to this video.
it's called county court.
Also worth mentioning specialist courts such as the Family or Drug courts as they also possess original jurisdiction.
Yeah the UK doesn't really have a UK wide system-Scots Law is distinct from English Law,except in employment law which covers Scotland too. If I remember right the highest court in Scotland is the High court of Justiciary but for the rest of the UK it's the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (this court is the highest court of appeal for civil cases for Scots too but only civil cases). Us Scots are an awkward bunch hahaha
So early that there's no one calling Vox liberal propaganda
Bob Jones but the are...
Bob Jones WRONG! SAD!
FAIK NOOS!
Propaganda needs to be intentionally misleading and biased. Vox never claimed to be anything but a liberal news company. They don't actively spread lies. They do actively spread opinions. Free speech yo!
Its not like they pretend they aren't left wing. The Times and The Economist in the UK is blatantly right wing and they still do quality journalism and Vox are the same.
I am going to take all of you to Supreme Court.
Left Anti PC I always wanted to visit !
chapter 7 I went there on my trip to D.C.! It's honestly not that interesting.
:D! field trip!
Left Anti PC you will hear from my fish lawyer
itsmehunter92 how bout dat .... 😂😂😂
Vox Videos are easily becoming my favourite videos! I love the editing, i love the attention to detail. Heck i even love the way they are narrated. Keep it up guys!
Excellent job, my friends. Speaking of the Supreme Court, I have a new series called Supreme Court Briefs. I think you all will enjoy.
Mr. Beat PRESENTSSSSSS
Supreme Court briefs
Man, i love that series
Aye I love that series!
Mr. Beat you have a good channel
I love ur channel
My mans out here self promoting
After the sad death of RBG, this has all become much more relevant now...
Thats why im here
Especially now
@@crpticshock Trumpist Takeover of the Goverment
Sad? Or karma?
@@Jakethegoodman Karma for Trump lol
Who else came after the election
Me! Lol 😂
Me!
Me
Here after they rejected Trump's plea to invalidate Pennsylvania's votes 9-0
PATRICK THAT WAS THE PENNSYLVANIA SUPREME COURT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH JOE BIDEN!
Wait, so if my state says recreational marijuana is legal, I can still be prosecuted by the federal government?
ThatOneStrangeGuyAng Yes, exactly.
ThatOneStrangeGuyAng yeah but they don’t enforce it.
Yes, because you are under the jurisdiction of both the federal government and your state government (EDIT: plus your local governments, such as county, and city unless you live in an unincorporated area). The reason California and many other states are able to legalize marijuana is that they can repeal their own state laws banning marijuana. But even in states that have legalized marijuana, it is still illegal because federal laws apply.
In the case the video talks about, that woman was using medical marijuana and believed she was doing nothing wrong because California had legalized marijuana for medical use. But it was still illegal at the federal level, so she was technically breaking the law, and the Supreme Court ruled that it was okay for the police to destroy the marijuana they had seized from her.
Yeah, but I think only if you start selling it for example, our move across state line (I am not American, just guessing)
Yes, states can’t just get rid of federal laws. Alabama can’t legalize monopolies for instance or Louisiana can’t make bank fraud legal in its border chase those are federal laws. You think the states should have more power? You’re
about 50 years to late
Very, VERY well done video. Great content and great explanations.
you guys deserve Oscar for your detailed animation
I'll have you know, that made very little sense.
The highest court of the land is Judge Judy's Court
Nah, the HIGHEST court is Snoop Dog's court, if you get what I mean
That was a great video. Whenever I'm in DC, I try to sit in a case. You just show up in the morning at the front of the building. There will be 2 lines- 1 to sit in the whole case, and 1 to just sit for 5 minutes. That said, all the cases I've see where dull stuff.
it's like regular court, but with sour cream and tomatoes.
Love this
Vox forgot to mention and imo should have mentioned that the federal SCOTUS can review state supreme court decisions too when there is a genuine constitutional question like whether the death penalty violates the 8th amendment, etc
Love these sort of videos. TEDed does some great ones too, though anyone know a channel that does something like this but about Canada?
thank u vox again 😁✌💕
Very helpful. Thanks
you missed the Court's original jurisdiction, as well as appeals from a 3-judge district court and from state supreme courts.
Very informative video
Great video
This aged well...
Gerat video with great Examples. Like!
Learning more about civics and government from Vox than I ever did in school.
for guyana its
Magistrates Court -> High of the Supreme Court of Judicature -> Court of Appeals -> Caribbean Court of Justice (thats like an EU Court)
There can also be direct appeals from individual state supreme courts, and appeals from state courts through the federal court system.
Yeah they glossed over that completely, I do believe it is meant to be much rarer to have a case appealed from a state supreme court or court of appeals compared to through a federal court but still nearly all murder cases for example start in the state courts.
Good content
please make more government related educational videos PLEASE!!!!!!! currently in ap gov and these videos help
Rest In Peace RBG
🙁
Congrats on 2Mil
RIP Ruth Bader Ginsburg
I absolutely love uncaring you were with trying to pronounce rotisserie chicken 😂😂
I'm playing a card game and @ 1:16 I'm like wtf is wrong with my connection💀💀
In the Philippines, the lowest in the court was Municipal Court or Metropolitan Court, then goes to the Regional Court through appeals and then to the highest either Court of Appeals of the Philippines or Supreme Court of the Philippines which is the final decision on the case
Wow vox made an actually educational video
Direct appeal of a Three-Judge District Court is also to the Supreme Court by appeal and not certiorari. So reapportionment cases or any law that requires review by a Three-Judge District Court is a pretty fast way to get judicial review without a ton of work.
Are you applying that fiction to something outside of the fiction itself? If so, what?
Nice video
Studying german-french law forces 'me to educate myself about the American system. Hence the Constitution, impeachment, voting system, senate and House of representatives, judical system, bi-partisan system and the presidential system but I'm glad to learn about it! These videos are great help!!
Link me any videos concerning American state system thanks
cool fact, jamal greene is talib kweli's brother.
so if i lost a case in a circuit court and wanted to appeal , the sc could just refuse to hear the case ?
Yep
calholli you are so ignorant
Technically you've gotten 2 fair trials before even appealing to the court. The SCOTUS is used nearly exclusively to clarify the constitution in cases that could set either dangerous or important precedent to the country.
You need to qualify for an appeal first, and then your appeal case must...appeal to the justices x)
But if it is worth their time and effort, they will most likely hear it. They are passionated professionnals. If your case raises essential constitutionnal questions, you are likely to be heard.
in india supreme court has to hear every appeal.
From the outside perspective Case Law and its processes seem so strange...
There is another path to the Supreme Court: by appeal from a final state court decision in which a federal constitutional issue was part of the state court's rationale. Famous cases like this include Miranda v Arizona, in which Ernesto Miranda appealed his criminal conviction in Arizona state court -- not federal lower courts -- to the Supreme Court.
Finally, it's not true that all cases are discretionary. The Court has original jurisdiction -- meaning the cases are heard by right, at the beginning by the Supreme Court and not a lower state or federal court -- in certain circumstances. These are described in Art. III, Sec. 2, of the Constitution and include controversies between the United States and a state, between two or more states, and "cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls..."
But this doesn't mean the nine justices preside over a trial. The Court typically appoint a "Special Master," to hear evidence and conduct proceedings, and this Special Master will then file a report, which the Court can choose to accept in whole or in part.
the whole health of a well functioning democracy hangs on the fairness and nuetrality of these handfull of people
And Donald Trump picked 1/3 of them.
Who made the background music?
It sounds a bit like C418 (Minecraft soundtrack)
hey y'all. if y'all would like to hear more about the supreme court, radiolab actually did a wonderful (if short) spin-off series about it called "more perfect." it's a podcast series, so hopefully commuters would get more out of it too.
also since it's produced by radiolab, i can guarantee that despite being a podcast about the supreme court, it'll be interesting. listen to it here (my fave ep is "the political thicket"): www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolabmoreperfect
Brazil loves to follow the US on so many things, they should take a look at this. Not exactly, just to have less cases at our Supreme court.
So perfect right now
I got a tour of the supreme court and actually went into the basketball court and gym above the supreme court. I also walked down the spiral staircase normally off limits.
It's just possible that fewer cases are brought to the Supreme Court than in years past.
Where are all the "fake news! liberal propaganda! unsubscribed!" comments? I must be early -_-
lol, when I first subscribed to VOX, it was sometimes mid last year, they had less than a million subs and look at them now :D
if conservatives are complaining, then they're doing their job well.
+xenoblad But conservatives are *always* complaining...
KSJDbv Sad!
That's their job.
Damnit Vox, you sucked me in. This was all basic civics. I wanted a simple explanation of how and when all sorts of cases. You explained that there are Federal District Courts, Circuit Courts and then SCOTUS, but some of the cases you used do not follow this rule. eg Bush v Gore was an appeal from a Florida Supreme Court decision. How does that work? Is that how it works for every state? I think I saw a decision recently that was on appeal from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, how do you from there to the Supreme Court, etc.
This video completely left out the jurisdiction of SCOTUS over state courts. Appeals from state courts can be made from the highest court where the case could be heard, which is usually, but not always, the state supreme court. In Florida, a decision from a circuit court can be appealed to a district court of appeal (DCA). If the DCA affirms the decision without an opinion expressly analysing the merits of the case, the decision cannot be appealed to the Florida Supreme Court, so in this situation, the decision of the DCA can be appealed to SCOTUS. For SCOTUS to hear an appeal from a state court, the issues being appealed must arise under the US Constitution or federal law, eg. Bush v. Gore arose under the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The reasons for SCOTUS to decided whether to hear the case is usually when there are different interpretations made in different states.
If I wanted to appeal a ruling by the Supreme Court, could I take it to the basketball court above them? Settle it for real
Used to cite Liptak during college
how is it that I learn more from vox than college
Omg, this video was my whole class Law 1101 about Federal Law ... interesting
I want to be a part of the SCOTUS. I know it's a long shot but hey it may happen
It's pretty interesting to me how simple many of the general rules in America are.
You guys have 1 Supreme Court and that only decides about federal laws.
We have like 5 different Supreme courts all dealing with special law branches like constitution, worker rights etc. and there is not really one that is higher than another
Where are u from if I may ask
"...the court is going to set law for the whole country." Constitutionally, the court doesn't set law but instead precedent for how to interpret current law.
The video is really cool. But in the beginning states that no one is entitled to a hearing by the court as a right. The court is however, the court of original jurisdiction in a few specific instances such as certain admirality cases, treaties with foreign sovereigns, and issues to do with ambassedors etc.
Why are fewer cases being decided by the S. Court?
Aren't courts supposed to be impartial? Yet the supreme court in the US has a red streak a mile long.
Courts are fictional. Are you applying the fiction, court, to specific structures/slaves..?
I had an opportunity .But i mist the first class mail and it was teturned .i wonder how to i can receive that mail or if i can smh
VOX: Because Americans need to learn basic, high-school level stuff.
Tychoxi This could also be helpful to non-Americans who are unfamiliar with the US court system.
This right here!
Haley Husk. Like me! Although our Dutch system works more or less the same way on a smaller scale.
Tychoxi well yeah, have you talked to any of us? kek
+ePlays Oooo, you are making me all wet, baby.
Thanks for informing us. I know there's a lot of unsettling feelings left after the supreme court said that they didn't want to hear Gavin Grimm's case today so this comes at a good time.
It's good that case got thrown out. Why should a mentally disabled girl, who thinks she is a boy, be allowed into boy restrooms. Just because she 'identifies' as a boy doesn't make her a boy - thus she has to use girl toilets or private toilets.
_Gloucester County School Board v. G.G_. was not "thrown out". The case was vacated and remanded to the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. In layman's terms, it means they sent it back to a lower court to re-argue the case, a redo.
Just in time to study for an AP pogo test
Can the H3h3 vs Matt Hoss case go to Supreme Court and set precedent for Fair Use throughout the US to abolish these unfair DMCA takedown claims on CZcams?
Fair Use is a federal law, so actually yes
They first need to go through the lower echelons, and then the SCOTUS would probablly refuse to hear the case since 1) they would already have had two fair trials 2) their case doesn't require the attention of the top 9 justices of the entire nation nor does it fall into SCOTUS's traditionnal field of expertise. Let me remind you that those guys are experts in Constitutionnal law, criminal law, buisness law and all the other major fields of Law but something as technical as Fair Use?... I doubt most of them ever had to hear/defend a case regarding that :/
Mikolaj. Then they're incompetent to make laws for a whole nation. This is actually a law that does affect people and needs immediate attention, regardless of the competence of the judges. This law affects lives, real people, and even more so, financially. It is a law that needs to be changed. The excuses that people find for the SCOTUS are unimportant since this law is a real disaster.
That case is currently at the District level. It can take a couple of years before it reaches the Supreme Court if it ever gets there.
they have have to let the case out in the open for a while...this case is still too recent for them. remember that same sex marriage wasnt sent to the supreme court until 2013. So it would take a while
Have I got a case for you!!!!!!I will be in touch
At first glance I thought Professor Greene had literally 200 million Windows 7 updates going through, but it was just a funky Group Policy
Vox reporter:The petition for a writ of certir-
Cetior-
Aight i give up
I think that they should have to take all the cases, so that important cases don't get dismissed.
"justice" is such a cool title to have
Ginsberg is such a boss. Npr did a really good story on her.
I think your reply was intercepted and forged. I requested original jurisdiction and the reply I received tated I needed to submit a writ of certioari.
////god i am obsessed with vox/////
So if they denied you does that mean no relief?
Wait so I can't fight my speeding ticket
It would be funny if like, the physical supreme court place was red and white and everywhere there was giant letters spelling out the Supreme logo.
1:20 didn't know Denzel Washington taught at Columbia Law School
"Which cases get to the court depends on the sitting justices" - and what about the standing justices?!
Justices sit on the bench. They do not stand.
1:13 🤣🤣🤣🤣 made me laugh
I hope senators know this but from previous confirmation hearings, they dont.
Vox is *low key* the new Seeker Daily.
some body Seeker Daily?
You've been Ginsburged
Fun fact. Prof. Jamal Greene is the brother of legendary rapper Talib Kweli, of "Black Star" fame.
Hey VOX! I have been very intrigued by your videos and researches.
I'd love to see a video about Algae biofuel planes and transportation viable in this decade! On top of that, Id love to also see a research in how this aero-transportation with biofuel can move the last bit of oil we may need instead of sticking with pipelines (that's sort of like a security theatre for pro-pipelines right now).
I mention about aero-industry is because they are facing challenges with vast changes in the economy of transportation as fuel becomes cheaper, and planes will change in distance to travel.
Why aren't the justices wearing Supreme bogos?
Very different from the Indian Supreme Court.. SCOTUS hears so less number of cases! Our SC decides perhaps 10 times more number of cases and it's really easy to apply for it in the SC..
I only clicked because I saw Supreme in the title
Daniel Avila same
Why can’t my brain process these things😩😤
When you know the show and the episode, and you're really 60😄😂😁
Who else is here after the Texas lawsuit got rejected
texas lawsuit?
@@sadbox7526
One year ago! It was a hilarious lawsuit.
informative
Have a seat, Joseph.
How did this turn out? Oops!
Waiting for a nationwide awb case
Same, clearly unconstitutional
wait wait you're going to tell me about the supreme court basketball court and not explain further??
So its easier to get your case into the Supreme Court in the US than to get into the IITs