0
How many justices serve on the Supreme Court as set forth by Congress in 1869?
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago
Answer
Congress set the number of US Supreme Court justices at nine in the Judiciary Act of 1869.
Explanation
Article III of the US Constitution only states that there is to be a Supreme Court. It does not say how many justices are supposed to serve at one time. Congress determines the number of Justices needed to handle the caseload of the Supreme Court. When the Court was first established by the Judiciary Act of 1789, it originally seated just six Justices: one Chief Justice, and five Associate Justices. The number expanded to seven in 1807, nine in 1837, and ten in 1863.
Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase requested the number be reduced to seven by attrition, meaning three of the ten Justices would not be replaced when they left the court. Congress granted this request in the Judicial Circuits Act of 1866, and the Court size subsequently declined by two members. Many historians suggest the real reason for the reduction in the number of justices was Congress' effort to thwart President Andrew Johnson and prevent him from nominating anyone to the Supreme Court during his administration. This claim tends to be supported by the timing and frequency of new Judiciary Acts. It should also be noted that the number of justices on the Court never declined below 8, following the Judiciary Act of 1866.
The Judiciary Act of 1869 (not to be confused with earlier Acts of the same name) fixed the number of seats at nine, where it has remained since.
- Judiciary Act of 1789: Court size 6
- Judiciary Act of 1801: Court size, 5
- Repeal Act of 1802: Court size, 6
- Seventh Circuit Act of 1807: Court size, 7
- Judiciary Act of 1837: Court size, 9
- Tenth Circuit Act of 1863: Court size, 10
- Judicial Circuit Act of 1866: Court size, 7
- Habeas Corpus Act of 1867: Court size, 8
- Judiciary Act of 1869: Court size, 9
President Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to expand the Court in 1937, in order to facilitate support for his New Deal Policies. Roosevelt's plan called for adding one additional Justice for each existing Justice who reached the age of 70 years, 6 months, but did not retire from the bench, until the Court reached a maximum capacity of 15 Justices. Congress successfully defeated the Court-packing Plan, but the Justices gradually accepted the New Deal, making alterations to the Court unnecessary. Eight of the nine Justices died during Roosevelt's tenure, allowing him to create a majority that approved of his policies.
The current composition of the Supreme Court is one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices.
Wiki User
∙ 13y ago
Wiki User
∙ 13y agoNone. Justices are judges who serve on the US Supreme Court, head of the Judicial Branch of the United States government. The US Supreme Court seats nine justices.
Congress is the collective term for the two parts of the Legislative, or law-making, branch of government, made up of the US Senate and the US House of Representatives.
There are 100 Senators in the Senate, two for each of the 50 states. There are 435 Congressmen (also called Representatives) in the House of Representatives. Each state has a varying number of Representatives, depending on the state's population.
Wiki User
∙ 8y ago9
Anonymous
Nine
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why can legislature check Presidents nomination of supreme court justices?
The constitution requires that supreme court justices be approved after the president nominates them by "advice and consent". Therefore, the congress can deny the candidate put forth by the president.
Who is chooses the chief Justice?
The Chief Justice position is put forth by the president and approved by congress. The same way all Supreme Court justices.
The powers of congress include the right to constitute the tribunals inferior to the supreme court to call forth what?
to call forth the militia/army.
What Article of the Constitution gave Congress the authority to create a federal court system?
Article III relates to the Judicial branch of government, and mandates creation of the Supreme Court. It also authorizes Congress to create federal judicial system below the Supreme Court, but not set forth rules for accomplishing this goal.---Article I addresses the role of the Legislative branch in government, and, again, empowers Congress to create Article I and III courts and tribunals, as the need arises.Article II of the Constitution addresses the authority of the President and the Executive branch of government. One power assigned the President is the ability to nominate US Supreme Court justices and Article III federal judges, with the "advice and consent" of the Senate.Each of the first three Articles discusses the courts to one degree or another, but none "set up rules for the federal court system." The Constitution creates a framework for government and describes the enumerated and separate powers of the various branches, and how they interrelate, but does not provide much specific instruction for day-to-day operation.
Can a US Supreme Court justice propose a bill to Congress?
No, technically a court can only "interpret" the laws set forth by the legislature. However, some "activist" courts have taken it upon themselves to give a whole new meaning to the law, effectively enacting one that the legislature never intended.
What recent piece of legislation put forth by the Obama administration was just upheld by the Supreme court?
In late June 2012, the Supreme Court ruled that healthcare reform, the Affordable Care Act (sometimes called "Obama-Care"), was constitutional.
How do justices get their jobs and what are the requirements?
U.S. Supreme Court Justices are nominated by the President of the United States and confirmed with the advice and consentof the Senate.Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia says, "The Constitution does not set forth any qualifications for service as a Justice, the President may nominate anyone to serve. However, that person must receive the confirmation of the Senate, meaning that a majority of that body must find that person to be a suitable candidate for a lifetime appointment on the nation's highest court."Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_US
Who appoints U.S. justices?
The appointment and confirmation of Justices to the Supreme Court of the United States involves several steps set forth by the United States Constitution, which have been further refined and developed by decades of tradition. Candidates are nominated by the President of the United States and must face a series of hearings in which both the nominee and other witnesses make statements and answer questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee, which can vote to send the nomination to the full United States Senate. Confirmation by the Senate allows the President to formally appoint the candidate to the court.
What role does the US Supreme Court play in enacting new laws?
The Supreme Court does not issue laws. The purpose of the court is to interpret the laws, not create them. Making federal law is the responsibility of the Legislative branch, Congress, which comprises the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Supreme Court is the head of the Judicial branch; the Executive branch includes the President, Vice-President and cabinet members.The Supreme Court only interprets the laws and the Constitution.George Washington invited the first Supreme Court to issue opinions advising on laws under consideration by Congress. The court declined to do so, citing the language in the Constitution that limits its jurisdiction to "cases and controversies" and reasoning that pre-enactment advisory opinions would not involve real cases or controversies.Since then, a law must be fully enacted before it can come to the court for constitutional review or, in other words, be a real case or controversy affecting real people.AnswerTechnically a court can only "interpret" the laws set forth by the legislature. However, some "activist" courts have taken it upon themselves to give a whole new meaning to the law, effectively enacting one that the legislature never intended.Courts do have the power to invalidate laws if they are unconstitutional. Since this power was intended by the founders (see the Federalist Papers) that power can hardly be called "activist." Moreover, some people insist it is "activism" when the Supreme Court vindicates fundamental freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution. For example, when in 1954, the Supreme Court struck down school segregation laws for violating equal protection guaranteed in the Constitution, many people accused the court of activism because legislatures had failed to do the same.The term "activist" is therefore a dangerous one to accept as descriptive of the court. In recent years, the conservative majority of the Supreme Court has reversed many long standing judicial precedents by issuing ruling that critics say have no other justifying virtue but that of applying rightwing political preference to all citizens through judicial fiat.The role of average citizens in this process may have been best expressed by future Supreme Court member Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. who wrote in 1869 that judges decide cases on "the felt necessities of the times." In other words, you can expect justices coming from corporate law backgrounds to feel the necessities of the times from the perspective of corporate leaders and justices coming from civil rights backgrounds to see the felt necessities of the times from the perspective of the movement for civil rights they participated in. Justices who gained their seat by political services are likely to see felt necessities of times from the perspective of their sponsors. This is not always true, there are examples in history of exactly the opposite being true, but on today's court, examples of the justices described above can be found and used to fairly reliably predict how they will rule based on who the litigants are. Human reasoning, after all, takes place in the human context.
Why does the Supreme Court of Canada allow blatantly flawed line-up identification to stand in the Eric Biddle case where almost all the other suspects were not even men?
The Supreme Court of Canada has made no such allowance.In the case of Eric Ralph Biddle v. Her Majesty the Queen of Canada, the Supreme Court overturned the decision of the appeal court and allowed an appeal based on the fact that the Crown had attempted to put forth evidence that the defence to which the defence would not have the chance to respond. The Supreme Court made no comments on the above question with its decision on R. v. Biddle.
What is the only federal court provided for in the constitution?
The Supreme Court of the United States isn't actually specified by name, but by function. Congress could have named the Supreme Court the "United States High Court" if they'd chosen and still been within the letter of the Constitution, as long as the designated court fulfilled all the requirements set forth in Article III and any other Articles, Sections, Clauses or Amendments that might affect its function. (For example, the Eleventh Amendment revoked the US Supreme Court's original jurisdiction over disputes between a state and citizens of another state.)Article III, Section 1"Section 1. The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive for their services, a compensation, which shall not be diminished during their continuance in office.""Section 2. The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;*--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects."In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction. In all the other cases before mentioned, the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction, both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations as the Congress shall make."The trial of all crimes, except in cases of impeachment, shall be by jury; and such trial shall be held in the state where the said crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any state, the trial shall be at such place or places as the Congress may by law have directed."Section 3. Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court."The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted."Eleventh Amendment*"The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state."
What paperwork comes with visitation rights?
Visitation rights are set forth in a court order of the family court. You can obtain a copy by visiting the court.Visitation rights are set forth in a court order of the family court. You can obtain a copy by visiting the court.Visitation rights are set forth in a court order of the family court. You can obtain a copy by visiting the court.Visitation rights are set forth in a court order of the family court. You can obtain a copy by visiting the court.
