POLS 2311 1st Edition Lecture 14 Outline of Last Lecture I. Origin and Structure of Federal BureaucracyII. The Budgetary ProcessOutline of Current Lecture II. The Federal Judicial SystemCurrent LectureThe Federal Judicial SystemArticle III of the Constitution established the Judicial System.The Supreme Court- Judges are nominated and confirmed from a majority Senate vote.- There are no age, residency, citizenship, or legal training requirements.- Judges are appointed for life and can remain there so long as they have good behavior.o Only one SC Justice has been impeached, but none have been removed.- The Supreme Court is the highest court in the US.- It has original and appellate jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction is the authority to be the first court to hear a case. Appellate jurisdiction is the authority to review cases that havebeen heard in lower courts.- Judicial review was established thanks to the case Marbury v Madison.- Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as a rule for setting subsequent cases of a similar nature.- A writ of certiorari is an order commanding a lower court to submit its transcript of a case so that the high court may deliver justice quickly to the appealing party.- The Supreme Court accepts a caseo It sets a date for an oral argument from both sides.o Each gets thirty minutes to make their case; both must bring lengthy briefs for the judges to read.o The judges then hold a private conference, discuss both sides, vote, and maybe change each other’s minds.- The judges then issue their decision and then give the reasons for why.- Majority opinion is when most of judges—the majority—agree on the decision.These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.- Plurality opinion is when the majority agrees on the decision, but the judges can’t agree on the legal basis.- Concurring opinion is where one judge votes with the majority, but disagrees with the reasoning.- Dissenting opinion is when the judges on the losing side explain why they disagree with the majority on the