For example,
Can they decide on their own whether a lawyer is qualified to go before them, whether expert testimony is subject to dispute, whether a particular fact or legal precedent is allowed to be discussed.
And even things like how often they meet, what constitutes a quorum, whether to wait for a justice who’s out of town or vote without him.
A good constitutional lawyer should discuss this at length.
But in very short form, the answer is yes, mostly they do. They decide who is qualified to practice before them, which cases to take, whether or not to go by precedent, and when to render a decision on a case (including waiting on a justice in the process of receiving Senate approval or temporarily incapacitated – they will generally render decisions where the new or absent justice’s vote is not crucial during the interim – a 8-0 or 6-2 case is not going to be materially affected by whether it’s 9-0 or 8-1, or 7-2 or 6-3, if and when the missing vote is available). Supreme Court Rules – the third link on the page gives the full rules, the others being informative data for those already familiar with them.
The various Judiciary Acts and the Constitution do put certain restrictions on this plenary power, but they’re frameworks within which the court’s rules work.
There are a few specific types of cases that they must accept under the constitution. Read the document for a list. Some years ago, NY and NJ got into a dispute over who owned Ellis Island and there was a lawsuit between the states which, according the consitution the court must accept as the court of original jurisdiction with respect both to fact and law. They did, but appointed a “master” (some kind of expert) to investigate and report to them. They accepted his report as their decision, from which there was no appeal. I forget who won. Somehow life went on whichever way it went.
An original jurisdiction case is “tried” – in the sense of evidence taking – before a Special Master, a senior member of the Court bar assigned as “judge pro tem”. The results, I believe generally along with the Master’s recommended decision, are then presented to the Justices for a decision by the court. The idea is that you don’t tie up competent appellate judges hearing trial cases, as I understand it.
This case was where the Supreme Court decided it could declare things unconstitutional so it’s another example of the SC deciding what it could do
Close. Marbury was the seminal case in which the Court asserted its power to declare an Act of Congress unconstitutional. Calder v Bull was a 1798 case in which the court determined that a state law was in fact constitutional, but asserted its right to declare it unconstitutional if it had in fact violated the Constitution. It is considered by many to be the seminal case leading up to the Marbury decision.
The quorum for the Court is set by federal statute, the United States Code, Title 28:
The right of audience before the Supreme Court is governed by Rule 5 of the Supreme Court Rules:
Some of our US law Dopers are members of the Supreme Court bar, so perhaps one of them will be along to elaborate.
What would happen if the Supreme Court couldn’t get a quorum? Would they appoint judges from the Court of Appeals to hear the case?
They would be powerless to decide a case until they have a quorum. Unlike circuit courts and district courts, a senior judge or retired justice can’t sit on the supreme court. Now, a retired justice might be able to act as a circuit justice, but it hasn’t before happened.
So, if they don’t get the 6 they need, nothing happens until they do. But these people aren’t exactly known for missing work a lot; as much as they get lambasted, they are very dedicated people.
You called?
It is said that the US Supreme Court bar is the easiest bar in the country to get admitted to, and I can’t disagree. Essentially all you need to get admitted is to be a member of a state court bar, to get two other Supreme Court bar members to sign your application, and to send a check. You can either get sworn in by your written application, or if you prefer and can get there with a sponsor on a day they are sitting, get sworn in before the court. My law school sponsors an annual swearing in for alumni, and I participated a few years ago on one of the last court sittings with Rhenquist as Chief Justice.