Supreme Court of Polaris

The Supreme Court of Polaris is the highest and final court of appeal in the Polarian justice system. It hears the cases of seventy-five to ninety litigants annually, typically on appeal from state high courts. The Supreme Court has ultimate and binding jurisdiction on all legal matters within Polaris, including the interpretation of the Constitution of Polaris and the applicability of statute law to it.

The Court convenes in Polaris City at Governor's Hall in the Polaris Capitol District. The Chief Justice of the Court is presently Thomas E. Galderson, appointed in 2014, alongside eight other associate justices. Justices are appointed by the Executive Council of Polaris with a majority vote, and are confirmed by the Senate of Polaris. The Polaris Federation Act mandates retirement at 80 for all justices.

Polarian judiciary
The Polarian judiciary is composed of an intricate network of courts and tribunals that process civil, criminal and administrative cases. Unlike the United States, the typical court of first incidence for most civil and criminal cases is in State Courts (SCs), which are subordinate to State Courts of Appeal (SCAs), and in turn the State High Court (SHC). Federal courts only deal with resolving disputes in relation to the federal bureaucracy, immigration, maritime law, intellectual property and telecommunications regulations, much of which is already dealt with through Administrative Tribunals (ADMTs). In a limited number of cases, the National Guard Tribunal of Review handles cases pertaining to paramilitary conduct, under the direct oversight of the Federal Court of Appeals.

Polarian courts, like the United States operate through geographic circuits. States, depending on geographic size and population have numerous court districts within their borders, ranging from one at-large district in Puerto Elanor, to six circuits in New Westshield. Under the Polaris Federation Act, States have the sole right to determine court districts. Polaris has three Federal Courts, distributed between the Western Polaris District Federal Court (serving Enderby, the Juno Islands, Santa Cruz, and Puerto Elanor), the Central Polaris District Federal Court (serving Hampton, New Westshield, and Penguville), and the Eastern Polaris District Federal Court (serving Snowville, Wilkes, Barrett, and the territories), all of which contain their own Federal Court of Appeals, which defer to the Supreme Court.

Appellate process
The Supreme Court of Polaris receives nearly several applications for further reference from litigants in state and federal courts, though will typically only entertain seventy-five to ninety of them. Most references are given to the Supreme Court are provided from State High Courts, Federal Courts of Appeal, and more rarely, from the Executive Council of Polaris or Legislative Congress of Polaris, who have referral powers under the Constitution of Polaris as to the constitutionality of legislation.

Eligibility for further review is determined by a preliminary examination of the case and its merits by a panel composing of three justices, each assigned for a corresponding federal court district. Panels rarely disclose their reasoning to grant cases extended review, though typically this is done out of consideration for cases of particular national significance or addresses a major area of law left unaddressed by the courts.

However, for most cases, "extended review" is seldom granted due to the volume of cases that the Supreme Court handles on an annual basis.

Constitutional interpretations
One of the Supreme Court's principal objectives is to render interpretations of the Constitution, and its application to legislation, and other cases. This includes the power of "judicial review", which enables the Supreme Court to examine existing legislation, according to what is in line with the constitution. Under the Polaris Federation Act, this is a power that the Supreme Court holds superlatively within Polarian law.

Many constitutional questions cover the distribution of responsibilities within the Polaris Federation Act between the state, territorial and federal governments. If a piece of legislation by any level of government is determined to have exceeded the stated responsibilities of that level of government, the Supreme Court may apply one of several remedies, including the striking down (or more formally, invalidation), of an entire law, the reading in of a law, which narrows or broadens the scope of a provision, or a stay that allows the federal or state legislature concerned to draft the appropriate legislation to align it with the constitution.

Critics of the Supreme Court argue that the power of judicial review is far too sweeping, and undermines the sovereignty of democratic institutions within Polaris.

Appointment process
Justices in the Supreme Court of Polaris are appointed by the Executive Council of Polaris by a majority vote among its members. All appointments to the Supreme Court are subject to majority confirmation by the Senate.

Candidates, under the Polaris Federation Act, are required to have at minimum five years judicial experience and seven years membership of at least one state bar society. In order to facilitate the appointment of former Antarctican judges to the Supreme Court, the Polaris Federation Act does not specify whether prior experience is necessarily in the Polarian system.

By convention, justices are appointed to represent each state, typically having had judicial experience in courts within that state. All mainland states are reserved one justice, while the Minervan Islands states are allocated two, with the three states rotating representation each time a vacancy occurs. At present, Puerto Elanor is the only state without representation in the Supreme Court of Polaris.

The Chief Justice to the Supreme Court is typically selected among the membership of the Court itself, by convention the oldest of the members.

Former justices

 * Rosaline L. Burnett, Associate Justice representing Puerto Elanor, (2011-2012), resigned for health reasons.
 * Burton P. Thirsk, Chief Justice representing New Westshield, (2011-2014), resigned for health reasons.