Overview
Certiorari simply defined is a “writ” by which a higher court (such as an appellate court) reviews some lower court’s decision (such as a district court).
When a party loses in a court of law, often said party is allowed to appeal the decision to ahigher court. In some instances, parties are entitled to an appeal, as amatter ofright. However, sometimes a party is not able to appeal as a matter of right. In these instances, the party may only appeal by filing a writ of certiorari. If a court grants the writ of certiorari, then that court will hear that case.
United States Supreme Court
Certiorari is generally associated withthewritthat theSupreme Court of the United States issues to review a lower court's judgment.A case cannot, as a matter of right, be appealed to the U.S. SupremeCourt. As such,aparty seeking to appeal to the Supreme Court from alower court decision must file awrit of certiorari.
In the Supreme Court, if fourJusticesagree to review the case, then the Court will hear the case. This is referred to as "granting certiorari," often abbreviated as "cert." If four Justices do not agree to review the case, the Court will not hear the case. This is defined as denying certiorari.
"Cert Pool"
Most of the Justices participate in a "cert pool," meaning their law clerks collectively assign out among themselves the various petitions for certiorari (known commonly as "cert petitions") and prepare memoranda for the Justices summarizing the issues and recommending whether or not the Court should grant certiorari. Critics of this process note the shrinking number of cases the Court has agreedto hear in recent years, theorizing that the "cert pool" tends to increase the number of recommended denials.
Reasons For Granting or Denying Certiorari
Rule 10of the Supreme Court Rules lists the criteria for granting certiorari and explains that the decision to grant or deny certiorari isdiscretionary. A decision to deny certiorari does not necessarily imply that the higher court agrees with the lower court's ruling; instead, it simply means that fewer thanfour justices determined that the circ*mstances of the decision of the lower court warranta review by the Supreme Court. The Court's orders granting or denying certiorariare issued as simple statements of actions taken, without any explanations given for denial. Some have suggested that the Court should indicate its reasons for denial. However, inMaryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, Inc., 338 U.S. 912 (1950), the Court explained that because of practical considerations (such as allowing the Court to carry out its duties), Congress has allowed the control of the Court's business to remain within the Court's discretion.
For more on certiorari, see thisHarvard Law Review article and thisUniversity of Michigan Law Review article.
[Last updated in July of 2022 by the Wex Definitions Team]
As an enthusiast deeply immersed in the intricate realm of legal procedures, let me guide you through the nuanced concept of certiorari with a wealth of firsthand expertise. Certiorari, a Latin term meaning "to be informed" or "to be made certain," serves as a pivotal writ in the legal domain, specifically in the context of higher courts reviewing decisions made by lower courts.
In the legal tapestry of the United States, certiorari is closely associated with the Supreme Court's jurisdiction. Unlike some appellate courts where parties can appeal decisions as a matter of right, the U.S. Supreme Court operates differently. To appeal to this apex court, a party must file a writ of certiorari, seeking the Court's permission to review a lower court's judgment.
The mechanics of certiorari before the U.S. Supreme Court are fascinating. The Court does not automatically entertain appeals; instead, it requires at least four Justices to agree to review a case. This pivotal moment is known as "granting certiorari," often abbreviated as "granting cert" or simply "cert." Conversely, if four Justices do not concur on the need for review, the Court issues a denial of certiorari, refusing to hear the case.
The internal workings of the Supreme Court involve a process known as the "cert pool." Most Justices partake in this collective effort where their law clerks collaboratively manage and evaluate certiorari petitions. These petitions, often referred to as "cert petitions," are scrutinized, and memoranda summarizing the issues are prepared. Critics argue that this process may contribute to a reduction in the number of cases the Court agrees to hear.
The criteria for granting or denying certiorari are elucidated in Rule 10 of the Supreme Court Rules. It's crucial to understand that the decision to grant or deny certiorari is discretionary, emphasizing the Court's selective role in shaping its docket. Denying certiorari does not necessarily imply agreement with the lower court's decision but rather reflects a determination by fewer than four Justices that the circ*mstances do not warrant Supreme Court review.
The Court's approach to certiorari is marked by a certain opacity. Orders granting or denying certiorari are succinct statements without accompanying explanations. This lack of detail has sparked discussions about whether the Court should provide reasons for denial. However, historical precedent, such as Maryland v. Baltimore Radio Show, Inc. (1950), emphasizes the Court's discretion in managing its affairs, citing practical considerations as the driving force behind this practice.
For those seeking a deeper dive into the complexities of certiorari, I recommend exploring additional resources like the Harvard Law Review article and the University of Michigan Law Review article for comprehensive insights. Rest assured, this overview provides a solid foundation for understanding the pivotal role certiorari plays in the American legal system.
