Describe the decision-making process of the U.S. Supreme Court. Include the types of decisions?
372350
Nobody knows the actual decision-making process except the members of the Court themselves.  The deliberations are private and not recorded; the only records are each Justice's personal notes.\n\nBut the reality is that there is likely not very much actual "deliberation."  Before arguments are even heard, the Justices have reviewed the briefs, facts, and the law and may know how s/he will vote early in the process.\n\nThe Justices discuss the case prior to (sometimes) and after arguments.  Then the Chief Justice will call for a vote and assign a writer for the majority opinion and dissent.\n\nThere have been times where it is speculated that a Justice was leaning one way on a particular issue and was "swayed" by another Justice.  This is probably pretty rare though.  (One example might be Kennedy joining O'Connor in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, the last major challenge to Roe v. Wade.  There may have been a change in the wording of the opinion to appease Kennedy's concerns that abortion rights would be too "strong.")
810803
executive (president), legislative (congress), judicial (supreme court).
1017376
the supreme courts are swamped.  cases are viewed in the order they come in, before a case can be reviewed a sentence must be obtained, then the attorneys must go through every point of law to determine what to file an appeal on, I believe this procedure is allowed 3 times.
555877
Access Supreme Court Decisions or plainview doctrine.
70834
The Supreme Court is independent because a justice can serve for life.  President Bush indicated before he was elected that he would place "strict constructionists" on the court who would decide cases on the merits of the Law only after considering all the facts.\n\nThe fact remains that the country has many issues that could be clarified by new laws.  one good example is obortion, whether you favor or oppose it.  The truth is that the issues divides the country regardless of party affiliation and is highly polarizing.  Therefore, it is impossible for Congress to pass any law that resolves the issue and the Constitution can not be amended for the same reason.  There aren't enough votes on either sidebut more than enough votes to stop the "wrong" decision by the other side.  Because of a failure of the Congress to pass laws, some expect the Supreme Court to take up the slack and legislate from the bench.  That would be a violation of the separation of powers for the three branches of government.  Therefore, regardless of his/her own beliefs, Supreme Court justices must set aside any personal views (one way or the other) and determine based on the arguments they hear and the briefs they read and a study of past decisions, who should win any particular case.  During recent hearings for Supreme Court nonimees, I heard no Politician blame himeself for failing to pass clear laws on any important issue.  Many had to be left vague to even get through Congress.\n\nLet's hope the Supreme Court remains above politics, even if different views are strongly held.  If we don't have the rule of law we have nothing.
881451
1.  The Supreme Court Justices are APPOINTED for life, not elected.  They are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.  They can also be impeached, but that's just as hard as impeaching the President.\n\n2.  The Supreme Court can review all laws after they are passed to see if they violate the constitution.  Ditto for treaties, but treaties are passed by congress after they are negotiated by diplomats or the president.\n\n3.  That depends on who the dispute is with.  If a State or a citizen sues the U.S. they go to Federal Court (but there are only a few things you can take the U.S. to court for).  If it's with another country, then it just depends.  The U.N. might try to negotiate it, or perhaps a third country.  But it all depends on the type of dispute.  When the U.S. had a dispute with Afghanistan over Osama Bin Laden, the U.S. resolved the dispute by invading Afghanistan.\n\n4.  Federal courts settle these disputes.\n\n5.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over formal impeachment proceedings.  The proceedings are held by the Senate after the House of Representatives has passed "articles of impeachment"\n\n6.  Article III (3)
11164
Start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States\n\nYou're not likely to find term paper quality answers to questions on websites like Yahoo Answers - people aren't, in general, too keen on doing other people's homework. You'd do better to find yourself some reliable reference pages on the internet to start your information searches. Wikipedia, the site the above article is part of, is always a good start, although you should take care to verify all information obtained from it.
44213
For the general public using the internet Find Law is an excellent site to study case opinions for the United States Supreme Court as well as the State Supreme Courts.\n\nhttp://my.findlaw.com/\n\nRandy
152985
judicial system \nlegislative system \nand executive system
121434
Legislative, Executive, and Judicial
85571
Court proceedings differ in each case that is brought before a judge...\nIt is basically the paperwork and story of each case to be presented and any evidence to use...
220079
Do you understand what you are asking?  There are thousands of such cases.  Are you interested in certain eras.  Maybe cases under the various Chief Justices.  How about certain types of cases?  Would like to compare similar case subjects prior to 1868 as opposed to post 1868?  However, you can start by going to the source link:
23577
The U.S. Distric Court is the court of first instance for all cases under federal jurisdiction, aside from bankruptcy cases. The US Courts of Appeals are intermediate appellate courts, and the Supreme Court is the final court of appeal for all cases, unless prohibited by law.
260268
Lowest Federal Court is the Federal District Court.  A state can have dozens of districts.  The only cases that come before the Supreme Court are cases of original jurisdiction such as issues between states.  This is a small % of its workload.  the other 98% of its cases the court chooses to hear.  They can reject an appeal from a lower court "stare decisis" or they can hear a case on appeal and decide there is no standing in which case the appeal evaporates or they can recommend case specifics or make a general ruling that often adds to the precedent body of rulings that establish general court trends.
326106
it's each justice's individual decision on a case.  actually, they're not required to write one, but they often do for legal clarification purposes
485022
the precedent case is what the courts base there decisions on\n\ncases that are ground cases that form the cornerstone to situations
913890
One thing the Supreme Court cannot do is render it's decisions in a proactive way. They have to react to cases. For example, they could not have ordered Florida's election officials and judges to stop re-counting the ballots in 2000 unless someone, like George Bush, had asked them to render that decision. The Court only acts based on disputes that are brought to them -- a dispute meaning two parties who fervently disagree with one another about some point of law.