U.S Supreme Court
A decision made by a higher court sets a binding precedent for the inferior court(s).
Justices have the ultimate job security. Supreme Court justices serve life-terms. On another note, what the Supreme Court says, goes. Their decisions become the "law of the land" and can overturn and create new standards, or precedents for the entire country. For example, Roe v. Wade was a decision on abortion and the precedent created by the Supreme Court is enforceable through the entire nation. State laws can be written about abortion, but they can not conflict with the Roe v. Wade precedent.
The Chief Justice sets the agenda for meetings.
The US Supreme Court has the authority to overturn a precedent in any case under their review, if they feel the precedent no longer applies to current social and legal circumstances. They can also ignore precedents if they feel a case creates an exception to the rule, for whatever reason.
The US Supreme Court is head of the Judicial Branch of government. The "inferior" courts in this branch are:US District CourtsUS Court of International TradeUS Court of Appeals Circuit Courts
The Supreme Court of the United States
That depends on which court you're referring to. In the federal court system, the US Supreme Court sets binding (or mandatory) precedent for all lower courts; the US Court of Appeals Circuit Courts set binding precedent for all US District Courts within their jurisdiction, but only persuasive precedent elsewhere; the US District Courts do not set binding precedent at all, they only set persuasive precedent.
A decision made by a higher court sets a binding precedent for the inferior court(s).
As the highest court in the US, a ruling by the Supreme Court can not be challanged legally.In effect lower courts must make rulings on cases in line with any historic, relavent Supreme Court decisions (or their rulings will be overturned by higher courts).This means that a ruling by the Supreme Court sets the US legal standard - sets a precedent."precedent" means coming before another or others in time, place, rank, or sequence.
Yes. All published opinions (majority, concurring, dissenting, etc.) except per curiam (unsigned opinions) may be cited as precedent. The US Supreme Court's official "opinion of the Court" (usually the majority decision) supersedes all lower court opinions, and sets binding precedent which both federal and state courts* are supposed to follow under the doctrine of stare decisis.* US Supreme Court decisions apply to state courts if they involve incorporated parts of the US Constitution, or federal laws that apply to (or within) the states.For more information, see Related Questions, below.
second circuit and supreme court
Justices have the ultimate job security. Supreme Court justices serve life-terms. On another note, what the Supreme Court says, goes. Their decisions become the "law of the land" and can overturn and create new standards, or precedents for the entire country. For example, Roe v. Wade was a decision on abortion and the precedent created by the Supreme Court is enforceable through the entire nation. State laws can be written about abortion, but they can not conflict with the Roe v. Wade precedent.
Marbury v. Madison was the first decision that the Supreme Court made that declared a law unconstitutional. This set a precedent in the US and in the entire world of what we call the Exercise of Judicial Review, affirming the powers of the court that are specified in Article III of the US Constitution.
The Chief Justice sets the agenda for meetings.
The Marshall Court set the precedent that US laws could be devalidated if they were found to violate the US Constitution and gave the courts this power.
Yes courts can depart from Precedents. However this depends on the level of the court and the precedent being relied upon. For instance the Supreme Court is not bound by any precedent, not even the one it set, yet the lower courts to it are bound by such precedents. Also the precedent being relied upon could have been overtaken by events e.g by change of law, time or any other factor hence making it obsolete and therefore courts departing from such precedent.
Marbury vs. Madison established the precedent of judicial review. Marbury vs. Madison was heard in 1803 before the US Supreme court.