what is an article 3

Contact: ✉️ [email protected] ☎️ (803) 302-3545

Article 3 of the constitution, article 3 – judicial, article 3, section 1, article 3, section 2.

• The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;—to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States; —between a State and Citizens of another State;  —between Citizens of different States, —between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.
• In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.
• The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Article 3, Section 3

• Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.
• The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Article I and Article II dealt with the executive and legislative branches. 

But, what is Article 3 of the Constitution?

Article 3 covers the judicial system.  That means that it deals with the courts and law and order.

Read on to find out how Article 3 acts as such a strong check and balance to avoid corruption.

Table of Contents

Article 3 Summary

Article 3 of the US Constitution lays down the framework of the federal government’s judicial branch and contains three main sections.

The sections of Article III are separated into clauses that detail different aspects of judicial power and legal structure and procedure.

Article 3, Section 1 of the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is at the head of the judicial branch of the federal government. It also allows Congress to establish lower courts as needed.

Judiciary Act of 1869

It is important to note that Article III of the United States Constitution does not establish the number of Supreme Court justices. 

However, the Judiciary Act of 1869 established the current limit of nine  Supreme Court justices  and has been the accepted number since.

If Congress repeals the Judiciary Act of 1869, the wording of Article 3, Section 1 allows for altering the number of Supreme Court justices.

Government offices must be held in good order

Section 1 further states that all judges in the Supreme Court and any federal judges in lower federal courts established by Congress must hold their offices in good order. 

It also entitles them to a salary during their service that cannot be decreased during their time in office.

Compensation for Judges

While the United States Constitution only establishes compensation for judges during their service, the Judiciary Act of 1869 establishes additional compensation options for judges by allowing them to retire with a pension.

Article 3, Section 2

Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 establishes the wide-ranging authority of the  Supreme Court  and any other federal courts established by Congress.

Get Smarter on US News, History, and the Constitution

Join the thousands of fellow patriots who rely on our 5-minute newsletter to stay informed on the key events and trends that shaped our nation's past and continue to shape its present.

Check your inbox or spam folder to confirm your subscription.

It establishes the Supreme Court as the final arbiter in cases regarding the US Constitution. It also gives the Supreme Court the final say regarding any law passed in the United States or any treaty established.

Section 2, Clause 1 gives a very detailed list of examples of what would fall under the Supreme Court’s authority to leave no doubt as to their role as the final arbiter on all legal matters.

The Supreme Court is expressly given the authority in all legal cases surrounding:

• Ambassadors
• Public ministers
• Maritime jurisdiction
• Disputes between states
• Disputes between a state and a citizen of another state
• Citizens of different states
• Citizens of the same state
• Any controversy where the United States is a party

While the massive scope of authority granted to the Supreme Court and its original jurisdiction may seem concerning at first, a close examination of the first sentence of Section 2, Clause 1 reveals a limitation on its power.

The first sentence states explicitly that:

“The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution.”

Therefore, the Supreme Court can only interpret the laws of the United States as legal cases arise and are prohibited from creating legal cases themselves to strike down laws or make new ones.

Article 3, Section 2, Clause 2 gives the Supreme Court jurisdiction over any case involving ambassadors or other public ministers.

It also gives jurisdiction where one or both parties in the legal case comprise a state. 

In all other legal cases, the Supreme Court functions as an appellate court, providing that Congress can make laws to set guidelines regarding when cases can be appealed.

While the United States Constitution does not establish any other courts other than the Supreme Court, it does state the appellate nature of the Supreme Court. 

There is also a provision in Section 1 of Article 3 allowing Congress to establish more courts as needed. 

These two things strongly imply that the founders of the Constitution expected that more courts would be created at the outset of the nation’s founding.

Article 3, Clause 3 specifies that any trial other than impeachment must be held with a jury in the state where the offenses were allegedly committed.

If the crimes were not committed in a specific state, the location would be determined by federal law and regulations passed by Congress for such a circumstance.

Article 3, Section 3, Clause 1 defines what constitutes treason against the United States and sets guidelines for how an individual shall be convicted of this crime.

What is treason?

It is clearly stated that  treason  involves a citizen waging war against the United States, allying with enemies of the United States, or giving any form of aid or help to enemies of the United States.

Two witnesses needed for a conviction of treason

An individual can only be convicted of this crime on the testimony of at least two witnesses or by confession in open court.

The confession in open court can only be voluntary and not compelled, as the  5th Amendment to the Constitution  guaranteed to the accused, including those accused of treason, the right against self-incrimination.

Treason is the only crime expressly defined and addressed in the US Constitution, implying that while the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, it is only a basic foundation.

The need to establish additional laws

The founders realized that true effective governance of the nation would arise out of the additional laws and measures passed by the federal and state governments.

Law and order would begin and end with the Constitution. Still, future citizens, Congresses, state and local governments, and  amendments to the Constitution  would need to address every point in between.

Article 3, Section 3, Clause 2 gives Congress the power to determine the punishment of the individual convicted of treason.

However, the punishment is limited to only the person who committed the crime. It cannot be imposed on any family, friends, or associates of the guilty individual as long as they weren’t involved in the crime.

Finally, while Congress is given the right to confiscate the individual’s property convicted of treason while they are still living when the convicted person dies, their property must be returned to their next of kin.

Article 3 Quiz

If you would like to download a PDF with our quiz, then please go to:

Download the quiz PDF

Alternatively, you can take our online quiz here:

Edward Savey

2 responses.

For the balance of power between the three branches of government, for any Congressional members to blatantly plan to change the “lean” of the Supreme Court from left to right or right to left, undermines the balance of power & checks/balances established by our Constitution! Following each Presidential election we can anticipate to possibility of another change in the size of the Supreme Court to flip the power to the “new majority” in Congress. How do we stop either majority party in Congress from attempting to “pack the Supreme Court?”

Sharon: Maybe the answer is “sortition.”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Article 4 of the Constitution

Article 5 of the constitution summary, article 6 of the constitution summary, article 1 of the constitution, please enter your email address to be updated of new content:.

© 2023 US Constitution All rights reserved

If you're seeing this message, it means we're having trouble loading external resources on our website.

If you're behind a web filter, please make sure that the domains *.kastatic.org and *.kasandbox.org are unblocked.

To log in and use all the features of Khan Academy, please enable JavaScript in your browser.

US government and civics

Course: us government and civics   >   unit 8.

• The Preamble to the Constitution
• Article I of the Constitution: The Legislative Branch
• Article II of the Constitution: The Executive Branch

Article III of the Constitution: The Judicial Branch

• Article IV of the Constitution: States, Citizenship, New States
• Article V of the Constitution: Amendment Process
• Article VI of the Constitution: Debts, Supremacy, Oaths, Religious Tests
• Article VII of the Constitution: Ratification

Want to join the conversation?

• Upvote Button navigates to signup page
• Downvote Button navigates to signup page
• Flag Button navigates to signup page

Video transcript

• Location, Hours & Parking
• Transportation Grants

• Our Mission
• Board and Officers
• Teacher Advisory Council
• The Courthouse
• The Federal Courts
• Photo Gallery Tour
• Schedule a Tour
• Student Art Competition 2024
• The Supreme Court and My Hometown
• Citizenship in the Nation for Scouts
• Girl Scout Day at the Courthouse
• Tinker v. Des Moines Exhibit
• Program Photos
• Bill of Rights Day 2023 Contest
• Constitution Day, September 17
• Summer Teacher Institute
• Democracy Badge for Girl Scouts
• Inside Government Badge for Girl Scouts
• Judicial Learning Center Tenth Anniversary
• Stories of the First Amendment Teacher Event
• Alexander Hamilton Exhibit
• Homeschool Educator Institute
• Law Day 2014 Lecture: Freedom Summer
• Freedom Summer Traveling Exhibition
• Student Center Landing Page
• The Role of the Federal Courts
• Organization of the Federal Courts
• How Courts Work
• Landmark Cases
• Educator Center Main Page
• Online Learning Resources
• Comparing State and Federal Courts
• Law Day Lessons and Activities
• Article III and the Courts

Our founders understood that judges who are able to apply the law freely and fairly are essential to the rule of law. The Constitution guarantees our rights on paper, but this would mean nothing without independent courts to protect them.

In our unique judicial system, courts are protected from the influence of other branches of government, as well as shifting popular opinion. This allows the judiciary to make decisions based on what is right under the law, without political or personal consequences.

Click here to visit the Student Center page about Judicial Independence .

The federal judiciary is defined and explained in Article III of the U.S. Constitution.  Click below to read each section of Article III, with an explanation.

Article iii of the u.s. constitution.

The Judicial Power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Section 1 Explanation:

The power to interpret the law of the United States will be held by the U.S. Supreme Court , and the lower federal courts.

Inferior courts will be created by Congress from “time to time.” The Constitution itself created only the Supreme Court, but allowed Congress to create other, inferior (lower) courts over time.  Thus as the case load of the Supreme Court grew, Congress was able to create the lower federal courts.

Federal judges will hold office “during good behavior” and they shall receive “compensation” for their services.

• Once they are appointed, federal judges remain in office during “good behavior.” In effect, most federal judges serve a life term (since the Constitution does not state a time limit or number of years).
• Once appointed, their salaries cannot be “diminished” or decreased. This protects the judges from being manipulated through their salary.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;–to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;–to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;–to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;–to Controversies between two or more States;– between a State and Citizens of another State ,–between Citizens of different States,–between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State , or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects .

Section 2 Explanation:

Section 2 of Article III describes the jurisdiction of the federal courts.  Jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear a case, so this section tells us what kinds of cases the Supreme Court and other federal courts will hear.

• All cases that arise under the Constitution, the laws of the United States or its treaties.
• All cases that affect American Ambassadors, public officials, and public consuls.
• All cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction (cases that involve national waters).
• All cases in which the United States is a party (when a state, a citizen or a foreign power sues the national government).
• All cases that involve one or more states, or the citizens of different states.
• All cases between citizens of the same state who are claiming land under grants from other states.
• Underlined portions were changed by the 11 th Amendment, which states that the judicial power of the United States does not allow a state to be sued by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.

Section 2 Continued –

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

Explanation:

Section 2 also notes that the Supreme Court will have original jurisdiction in any case dealing with or affecting an Ambassador, Public Minister or Consul, or in which a state is a party.

• Original jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear a case first.  This means that, in any case dealing with these groups of public servants, the Supreme Court must hear the case first, and no lower court can do so.
• The number of original jurisdiction cases heard by the United States Supreme Court is very low; less than 1% of all their cases.

In addition to these original jurisdiction cases, the Supreme Court will have appellate jurisdiction   in all other cases.

• Appellate jurisdiction is the power to hear a case AFTER a lower court has already decided the case.  That is what it means to hear the case on appeal.
• The vast majority cases heard by the United States Supreme Court today are appellate cases.
• The Supreme Court is the “court of last resort” that is, the final court in which a citizen, state or other entity can have their case heard.
• The Supreme Court is the only federal court to have BOTH original and appellate jurisdiction.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

• This final portion of section 2 tells us that in the trial of all crimes, except impeachment, the accused has a right to a trial by jury.  These trials are held in the state where the crime is committed.
• Impeachment is the process described in the Constitution by which high officers of the U.S. government may be accused, tried, and removed from office for misconduct; the House of Representatives is responsible for the inquiry and formal accusation, and the Senate is responsible for the trial.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court. The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Section 3 Explanation:

Section 3 of Article III deals with the crime of treason, first by giving us a definition of the crime, then by telling us how the crime will be tried.

• Treason is defined in the Constitution as levying war against the United States, or giving aid to our enemies.
• This is the only crime actually defined in the Constitution.  Why?  The founders were afraid that people could be charged with treason, when they were really just engaging in dissent .  Part of living in a democracy is the ability we all have to disagree with our government.  If simply speaking out against the government were treason, then the government could quash all dissent, and we would not have a free country.  By defining treason in the Constitution, the founders made sure that those accused of treason had to do more than simply say things our government or leaders didn’t like.  To be guilty of treason, they had to take actual action (make war against our government or directly help our enemies).  This protects our freedom of speech from being limited.
• Section 3 tells us that, to be convicted of treason, there must be two witnesses to the same overt act, or that the person committing treason must confess in open court.
• Congress has the power to determine the punishment for treason, which ranges from five years in prison and a $10,000 fine, up to life in prison or death.

America's Founding Documents

The Constitution: What Does it Say?

The Constitution of the United States contains a preamble and seven articles that describe the way the government is structured and how it operates. The first three articles establish the three branches of government and their powers: Legislative (Congress), Executive (office of the President,) and Judicial (Federal court system). A system of checks and balances prevents any one of these separate powers from becoming dominant. Articles four through seven describe the relationship of the states to the Federal Government, establish the Constitution as the supreme law of the land, and define the amendment and ratification processes.

Article I  assigns the responsibility for making laws to the Legislative Branch (Congress). Congress is divided into two parts, or “Houses,” the House of Representatives and the Senate. The bicameral Congress was a compromise between the large states, which wanted representation based on population, and the small ones, which wanted the states to have equal representation.

Article II details the Executive Branch and the offices of the President and Vice President. It lays down rules for electing the President (through the Electoral College), eligibility (must be a natural-born citizen at least 35 years old), and term length. The 12th and 25th Amendments modified some of these rules.

Article III

Article III establishes the Judicial Branch with the U.S. Supreme Court as the federal court system’s highest court. It specifies that Federal judges be appointed for life unless they commit a serious crime. This article is shorter than Articles I and II. The Federal Convention left much of the work of planning the court system to the First Congress. The 1789 Judiciary Act created the three-tiered court system in place today.

Article IV outlines states’ powers in relationship to each other. States have the authority to create and enforce their own laws but must respect and help enforce the laws of other states. Congress may pass Federal laws regarding how states honor other states’ laws and records.

Article V explains the amendment process, which is different and more difficult than the process for making laws. When two-thirds of the Senate and two-thirds of the House of Representatives vote to change the Constitution, an amendment goes to the state legislatures for a vote. Alternatively, two-thirds of the state legislatures can submit an application to Congress, and then Congress calls a national convention at which states propose amendments. Three-fourths of the state legislatures or state conventions must vote in favor of an amendment to ratify it.

Article VI states that Federal law is supreme, or higher than, state and local laws. This means that if a state law conflicts with a Federal law, Federal law takes precedence.

Article VII

Article VII describes the ratification process for the Constitution. It called for special state ratifying conventions. Nine states were required to enact the Constitution. Rhode Island became the 13th state to ratify the Constitution in 1790.

Back to Constitution main page How Did it Happen?

Explore the Constitution

The constitution.

• Read the Full Text

Dive Deeper

Constitution 101 course.

• The Drafting Table
• Supreme Court Cases Library
• Founders' Library
• Constitutional Rights: Origins & Travels

Start your constitutional learning journey

• News & Debate Overview
• Constitution Daily Blog
• America's Town Hall Programs
• Special Projects
• Media Library

America’s Town Hall

Watch videos of recent programs.

• Education Overview

Constitution 101 Curriculum

• Classroom Resources by Topic
• Classroom Resources Library
• Live Online Events
• Professional Learning Opportunities
• Constitution Day Resources

Explore our new 15-unit high school curriculum.

• Explore the Museum
• Plan Your Visit
• Exhibits & Programs
• Field Trips & Group Visits
• Host Your Event
• Buy Tickets

New exhibit

The first amendment, article iii, judicial branch.

Signing Details

Signed in convention September 17, 1787. Ratified June 21, 1788. A portion of Article III, Section 2, was changed by the 11th Amendment

The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Interpretations & Debate

Read interpretations of article iii, section 1.

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;-- to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make.

The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment; shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed.

Read Interpretations of Article III, Section 2

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have Power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

Read Interpretations of Article III, Section 3

Modal title

Modal body text goes here.

Share with Students

Mobile Menu Overlay

The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW Washington, DC 20500

The Judicial Branch

Where the executive and legislative branches are elected by the people, members of the Judicial Branch are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the Judicial Branch, leaves Congress significant discretion to determine the shape and structure of the federal judiciary. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to Congress — at times there have been as few as six, while the current number (nine, with one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices) has only been in place since 1869. The Constitution also grants Congress the power to establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and to that end Congress has established the United States district courts, which try most federal cases, and 13 United States courts of appeals, which review appealed district court cases.

Federal judges can only be removed through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction in the Senate. Judges and Justices serve no fixed term — they serve until their death, retirement, or conviction by the Senate. By design, this insulates them from the temporary passions of the public, and allows them to apply the law with only justice in mind, and not electoral or political concerns.

Generally, Congress determines the jurisdiction of the federal courts. In some cases, however — such as in the example of a dispute between two or more U.S. states — the Constitution grants the Supreme Court original jurisdiction, an authority that cannot be stripped by Congress.

The courts only try actual cases and controversies — a party must show that it has been harmed in order to bring suit in court. This means that the courts do not issue advisory opinions on the constitutionality of laws or the legality of actions if the ruling would have no practical effect. Cases brought before the judiciary typically proceed from district court to appellate court and may even end at the Supreme Court, although the Supreme Court hears comparatively few cases each year.

Federal courts enjoy the sole power to interpret the law, determine the constitutionality of the law, and apply it to individual cases. The courts, like Congress, can compel the production of evidence and testimony through the use of a subpoena. The inferior courts are constrained by the decisions of the Supreme Court — once the Supreme Court interprets a law, inferior courts must apply the Supreme Court’s interpretation to the facts of a particular case.

The Supreme Court of the United States

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the land and the only part of the federal judiciary specifically required by the Constitution.

The Constitution does not stipulate the number of Supreme Court Justices; the number is set instead by Congress. There have been as few as six, but since 1869 there have been nine Justices, including one Chief Justice. All Justices are nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and hold their offices under life tenure. Since Justices do not have to run or campaign for re-election, they are thought to be insulated from political pressure when deciding cases. Justices may remain in office until they resign, pass away, or are impeached and convicted by Congress.

The Court’s caseload is almost entirely appellate in nature, and the Court’s decisions cannot be appealed to any authority, as it is the final judicial arbiter in the United States on matters of federal law. However, the Court may consider appeals from the highest state courts or from federal appellate courts. The Court also has original jurisdiction over limited types of cases, including those involving ambassadors and other diplomats, and in cases between states.

Although the Supreme Court may hear an appeal on any question of law provided it has jurisdiction, it usually does not hold trials. Instead, the Court’s task is to interpret the meaning of a law, to decide whether a law is relevant to a particular set of facts, or to rule on how a law should be applied. Lower courts are obligated to follow the precedent set by the Supreme Court when rendering decisions.

In almost all instances, the Supreme Court does not hear appeals as a matter of right; instead, parties must petition the Court for a writ of certiorari. It is the Court’s custom and practice to “grant cert” if four of the nine Justices decide that they should hear the case. Of the approximately 7,500 requests for certiorari filed each year, the Court usually grants cert to fewer than 150. These are typically cases that the Court considers sufficiently important to require their review; a common example is the occasion when two or more of the federal courts of appeals have ruled differently on the same question of federal law.

If the Court grants certiorari, Justices accept legal briefs from the parties to the case, as well as from amicus curiae, or “friends of the court.” These can include industry trade groups, academics, or even the U.S. government itself. Before issuing a ruling, the Supreme Court usually hears oral arguments, where the various parties to the suit present their arguments and the Justices ask them questions. If the case involves the federal government, the Solicitor General of the United States presents arguments on behalf of the United States. The Justices then hold private conferences, make their decision, and (often after a period of several months) issue the Court’s opinion, along with any dissenting arguments that may have been written.

The Judicial Process

Article III of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that every person accused of wrongdoing has the right to a fair trial before a competent judge and a jury of one’s peers.

The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments to the Constitution provide additional protections for those accused of a crime. These include:

• A guarantee that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without the due process of law
• Protection against being tried for the same crime twice (“double jeopardy”)
• The right to a speedy trial by an impartial jury
• The right to cross-examine witnesses, and to call witnesses to support their case
• The right to legal representation
• The right to avoid self-incrimination
• Protection from excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments

Criminal proceedings can be conducted under either state or federal law, depending on the nature and extent of the crime. A criminal legal procedure typically begins with an arrest by a law enforcement officer. If a grand jury chooses to deliver an indictment, the accused will appear before a judge and be formally charged with a crime, at which time he or she may enter a plea.

The defendant is given time to review all the evidence in the case and to build a legal argument. Then, the case is brought to trial and decided by a jury. If the defendant is determined to be not guilty of the crime, the charges are dismissed. Otherwise, the judge determines the sentence, which can include prison time, a fine, or even execution.

Civil cases are similar to criminal ones, but instead of arbitrating between the state and a person or organization, they deal with disputes between individuals or organizations. In civil cases, if a party believes that it has been wronged, it can file suit in civil court to attempt to have that wrong remedied through an order to cease and desist, alter behavior, or award monetary damages. After the suit is filed and evidence is gathered and presented by both sides, a trial proceeds as in a criminal case. If the parties involved waive their right to a jury trial, the case can be decided by a judge; otherwise, the case is decided and damages awarded by a jury.

After a criminal or civil case is tried, it may be appealed to a higher court — a federal court of appeals or state appellate court. A litigant who files an appeal, known as an “appellant,” must show that the trial court or administrative agency made a legal error that affected the outcome of the case. An appellate court makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or agency — it does not receive additional evidence or hear witnesses. It may also review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn a trial outcome on factual grounds if the findings were “clearly erroneous.” If a defendant is found not guilty in a criminal proceeding, he or she cannot be retried on the same set of facts.

Federal appeals are decided by panels of three judges. The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in a written document called a “brief.” In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that the lower decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the “appellee” or “respondent,” tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any errors made by the trial court are not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.

The court of appeals usually has the final word in the case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc — that is, by a larger group of judges of the court of appeals for the circuit.

A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file a petition for a “writ of certiorari,” which is a document asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. The Supreme Court, however, is not obligated to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves a new and important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. (There are also special circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal.) When the Supreme Court hears a case, the parties are required to file written briefs and the Court may hear oral argument.

Stay Connected

We'll be in touch with the latest information on how President Biden and his administration are working for the American people, as well as ways you can get involved and help our country build back better.

Opt in to send and receive text messages from President Biden.

Skip to main navigation

• Email Updates
• Federal Court Finder

About Federal Judges

Federal judges work to ensure equal justice under the law. Learn about the different kinds of federal judges and the cases they hear.

Article III Judges

Article III of the Constitution governs the appointment, tenure, and payment of Supreme Court justices, and federal circuit and district judges. These judges, often referred to as “Article III judges,” are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate.

Article III states that these judges “hold their office during good behavior,” which means they have a lifetime appointment, except under very limited circumstances. Article III judges can be removed from office only through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. Article III judgeships are created by legislation enacted by Congress. Track authorized judgeships from 1789 to present.

The Constitution also provides that judges’ salaries cannot be reduced while they are in office. Article III judicial salaries are not affected by geography or length of tenure.

Supreme Court Justices

The nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. They hear cases and controversies arising under the Constitution or U.S. law and controversies that involve the United States as a party of entities and parties of different states, that are appealed from federal courts or state courts.

Learn more about Supreme Court justices .

Court of Appeals Judges

Court of Appeals judges, also known as circuit judges, sit in one of the 12 regional circuits across the United States, or the Federal Circuit. They usually sit in a panel of three judges and determine whether or not the law was applied correctly in the district court, also known as trial court, as well as appeals from decisions of federal administrative agencies and some original proceedings filed directly with the courts of appeals.

Learn more about the court of appeals from the following resources:

• Appellate Cases

District Court Judges

District court judges sit in one of 94 district or trial courts across the United States. They handle civil and criminal cases. A district court judge typically is responsible for supervising the pretrial process and conducting trials, which includes a variety of procedures including:

• managing the selection of juries and the instructions jurors receive throughout a trial;
• ruling on admission of evidence;
• pleas in criminal cases;
• resolving any issues surrounding the acceptance of the verdict and entry of judgment; and
• sentencing the defendant if a trial results in conviction.

Learn more about district courts from the following resources:

• Civil Cases
• Criminal Cases
• Federal Judicial Center U.S. District Court History and Information  

Learn more about appellate court and district court judgeships , which are created by legislation enacted by Congress.

Senior Judges

Article III judges who have met age and service requirements set by federal statute are eligible to take senior status if they are at least 65 years old and have served at least 15 years on the bench, or any combination of age and years of service thereafter that equals 80. Regardless of age, judges must serve at least 10 years to qualify for senior status.

Upon taking senior status, judges may choose to handle a reduced caseload. Senior judges handle about 20 percent of the total district and appellate caseload. By taking senior status, even if maintaining a full caseload, a judge creates a vacancy on the court, to be filled by the nomination and confirmation process for Article III judges.

Senior judges receive the salary of their position at the time of taking senior status as an annuity. 

Because there is no mandatory retirement age for Article III judges, there is no requirement that they take senior status. 

Other Types of Judges

There are other types of judges and judicial officers who preside over certain kinds of cases, matters, and proceedings.

Magistrate Judges

Magistrate judges are judicial officers of the U.S. district court appointed by the district judges of the court to handle a variety of judicial proceedings.

They have authority to issue warrants, conduct preliminary proceedings in criminal cases, such as initial appearances and arraignments, and hear cases involving petty offenses committed on federal lands. In most districts, magistrate judges handle pretrial motions and hearings in civil and criminal cases. While most civil cases are tried by district judges, magistrate judges may also preside over civil trials if all parties consent.

Like other federal judges, all full-time magistrate judges are paid the same salary, regardless of where they serve or their years of service.

The position and authority of magistrate judges was established in 1968. By federal law, magistrate judges must meet specified eligibility criteria, including at least five years as a member in good standing of a state or territory’s highest court bar. They must also be vetted by a merit selection panel that consists of lawyers and non-lawyers from the community. By majority vote of the U.S. district judges of the court, magistrate judges are appointed for a renewable term of eight years. In addition, there are a small number of part-time magistrate judges who serve four-year terms.

The number and location of magistrated judges is determined by the Judicial Conference of the United States .

Learn more about magistrate judges from the following resources:

• A Guide to the Legislative History of the Federal Magistrate Judges System (pdf)
• Inventory of United States Magistrate Judge Duties (pdf)
• Federal Judicial Center Information on Magistrate Judgeships

Bankruptcy Judges

Bankruptcy judges are judicial officers of the district court who preside exclusively over bankruptcy proceedings  and cases.

Bankruptcy judges receive the same annual salary, no matter where they serve or how many years of service.

They are appointed to renewable 14-year terms by a majority of the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for their circuit with assistance from the circuit council.

The bankruptcy judge position was established in 1978, and the appointment process is set by Judicial Conference policy, in accordance with the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judgeship Act of 1984. Bankruptcy judges must meet eligibility criteria, including being a member of the bar in good standing. Circuit councils may appoint a merit selection panel, consisting of judges and other legal professionals, to review and recommend candidates for appointment.  

Bankruptcy judgeships are created pursuant to legislation enacted by Congress. Learn more about the history of bankruptcy judges from the following resources:

• Federal Judicial Center Information on Bankruptcy Judges

Recalled Judges

Similar to senior status Article III judges, bankruptcy and magistrate judges may continue to provide judicial assistance after they have retired. Generally, recalled judges exercise all the powers and duties that they had as an active judge. Circuit councils determine whether there is a substantial need for recall services from bankruptcy and magistrate judges based on court workload. In addition, recall requests that seek staffing or that cost more than a certain amount in additional salary and travel expenses must be approved by a Judicial Conference committee. Retired bankruptcy and magistrate judges are appointed for recall service for a specific period of time but no more than three years, which may be renewed.

Visiting Judges

Visiting judges who may sit by designation and assignment in any other federal court having a need for their service. They provide temporary assistance not only when a court’s own judges must disqualify themselves, but also to help meet the caseload needs arising from vacancies, lack of sufficient judgeships, specific emergencies, and other workload imbalances.

Judges sitting with another court within their circuit are on an intracircuit assignment, which is approved by the circuit chief judge. Judges sitting with a court outside of their home circuit are on an intercircuit assignment. For Article III judges, intercircuit assignments must be approved by the Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. Temporary assignments for bankruptcy and magistrate judges are coordinated by chief judges of the courts and circuits.

• IAS Questions
• IAS Polity Questions
• What Is Article 3 Of The Indian Constitution

What is Article 3 of the Indian Constitution?

Article 3 of the Indian Constitution deals with the formation of new States and alteration of areas, boundaries or names of existing States . In this regard, the Parliament may by law:

• form a new State by separation of territory from any State or by uniting two or more States or parts of States, or by uniting any territory to a part of any State;
• increase the area of any State;
• diminish the area of any State;
• alter the boundaries of any State;
• alter the name of any State; 

Further Reading:

• List of Important Articles in the Indian Constitution
• President of India – Article 52-62
• Functions of the Parliament

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Your Mobile number and Email id will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Request OTP on Voice Call

Post My Comment

IAS 2024 - Your dream can come true!

Download the ultimate guide to upsc cse preparation.

• Share Share

Register with BYJU'S & Download Free PDFs

Register with byju's & watch live videos.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 1:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State, between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Article III, Section 2, Clause 1 identifies the circumstances and parties to which the judicial power of the National Government applies. 1 Footnote U.S. Const. art. III, § 2, cl. 1 . As provided by the Constitution, the judicial power extends to nine classes of cases and controversies which fall into two general groups depending on the “character of the cause” and the “character of the parties.” 2 Footnote Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264, 378 (1821) . As to the “character of the cause,” the judicial power extends to cases arising under the “Constitution, the Laws of the United States and Treaties made under . . . their Authority” ; to all cases “affecting Ambassadors, or other public Ministers and Consuls” ; and to all cases of “admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction.” 3 Footnote U.S. Const. art. III § 2, cl. 1 . As to the “character of the parties,” the judicial power extends to controversies where the “United States shall be a Party” ; and controversies “between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State; between Citizens of different States;-between Citizens of the same State claiming Land under Grants of different States, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.” 4 Footnote U.S. Const. art. III § 2, cl. 1 . In Cohens v. Virginia , Chief Justice John Marshall explained these principles, stating:

In the first, jurisdiction depends on the character of the cause, whoever may be the parties. This class comprehends ‘all cases in law and equity arising under this constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority.’ This cause extends the jurisdiction of the court to all the cases described, without making in its terms any exception whatever, and without any regard to the condition of the party. If there be any exception, it is to be implied, against the express words of the article. In the second class, the jurisdiction depends entirely on the character of the parties. In this are comprehended ‘controversies between two or more states, between a state and citizens of another state,’ and ‘between a state and foreign states, citizens or subjects’ if these be the parties, it is entirely unimportant, what may be the subject of controversy. Be it what it may, these parties have a constitutional right to come into the courts of the Union. 5 Footnote Cohens v. Virginia, 19 U.S. (6 Wheat.) 264, 378 (1821) .

The Supreme Court has further noted that judicial power is “the power of a court to decide and pronounce a judgment and carry it into effect between persons and parties who bring a case before it for decision.” 6 Footnote Muskrat v. United States, 219 U.S. 346, 356 (1911) . The meaning attached to the terms “cases” and “controversies” 7 Footnote The two terms may be used interchangeably, inasmuch as a “controversy,” if distinguishable from a “case” at all, is so only because it is a less comprehensive word and includes only suits of a civil nature. Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227, 239 (1937) . determines therefore the extent of the judicial power as well as the capacity of the federal courts to receive jurisdiction. According to Chief Justice Marshall in Osborn v. Bank of the United States , judicial power is capable of acting only when the subject is submitted in a case and a case arises only when a party asserts his rights “in a form prescribed by law.” 8 Footnote Osborn v. Bank of the United States, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 738 (1824) .

Justiciable “cases” and “controversies” not only require that disputes be of the types specified in Article III, Section 2, Clause 1, but also that the disputes be, in fact, actual “cases” and “controversies.” Consequently, the parties must truly be adverse to each, the dispute must be concrete, not hypothetical, and the dispute must be capable of being resolved through an award of specific relief. In Aetna Life Insurance Company v. Haworth , Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes explained this aspect of the “cases” and “controversies” requirement stating:

A “controversy” in this sense must be one that is appropriate for judicial determination. A justiciable controversy is thus distinguished from a difference or dispute of a hypothetical character; from one that is academic or moot. The controversy must be definite and concrete, touching the legal relations of parties having adverse legal interests. It must be a real and substantial controversy admitting of specific relief through a decree of a conclusive character, as distinguished from an opinion advising what the law would be upon a hypothetical state of facts. 9 Footnote Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227, 240–41 (1937) . Cf. Public Service Comm’n v. Wycoff Co., 344 U.S. 237, 242 (1952) .

Chief Justice Earl Warren also advised on the nature of “cases” and “controversies,” noting:

Embodied in the words “cases” and “controversies” are two complementary but somewhat different limitations. In part those words limit the business of federal courts to questions presented in an adversary context and in a form historically viewed as capable of resolution through the judicial process. And in part those words define the role assigned to the Judiciary in a tripartite allocation of power to assure that the federal courts will not intrude into areas committed to the other branches of government. Justiciability is the term of art employed to give expression to this dual limitation placed upon federal courts by the case and controversy doctrine. 10 Footnote Flast v. Cohen, 392 U.S. 83, 94–95 (1968) .

Factors which determine whether a dispute qualifies as a “case” or “controversy” under the Constitution include adversity, the existence of a real interest, and standing. Adversity requires that the parties be truly adverse to each other with real interests in contention. 11 Footnote Muskrat v. United States, 219 U.S. 346 (1911) . As such, suits that are collusive or feigned by two friendly parties to resolve a question of interest to them are not justiciable. 12 Footnote Lord v. Veazie, 49 U.S. (8 How.) 251 (1850) . A real interest requires that a real issue be presented, as contrasted with speculative, abstract, hypothetical, or moot issues or cases that are not yet ripe for review. 13 Footnote Ala. State Fed’n of Labor v. McAdory, 325 U.S. 450, 461 (1945) (stating that it is the Court’s “considered practice not to decide abstract, hypothetical or contingent questions.” ); Giles v. Harris, 189 U.S. 475, 486 (1903) (stating that a party cannot maintain a suit “for a mere declaration in the air” ); Texas v. ICC, 258 U.S. 158 (1922) ( “It is only where rights, in themselves appropriate subjects of judicial cognizance, are being, or about to be, affected prejudicially by the application or enforcement of a statute that its validty may be called in question by a suitor and determined by an exertion of the judicial power.” ); Ashwander v. TVA, 297 U.S. 288, 324 (1936) ( “The pronouncements, policies and program of the Tennessee Valley Authority and its directors, their motives and desires, did not give rise to a justiciable controversy save as they had fruition in action of a definite and concrete character constituting an actual or threatened interference with the rights of the person complaining.” Standing concerns who may bring a suit and requires that the party seeking relief has “alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy as to assure that concrete adverseness which sharpes the presentation of issues upon which the court so largely depends of illumination of difficult constitutional questions.” 14 Footnote Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 204 (1962) . That persons or organizations have a personal, ideological interest sufficiently strong to create adverseness is not alone enough to confer standing; rather the adverseness is the consequence of one being able to satisfy the Article III requisite of injury in fact. Valley Forge Christian College v. Ams. United, 454 U.S. 464, 482–486 (1982) ; Schlesinger v. Reservists Comm. To Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208, 225–226 (1974) . Nor is the fact that, if plaintiffs have no standing to sue, no one would have standing, a sufficient basis for finding standing. Id. at 227 . The constitutional requirements for standing under Article III require that the plaintiff has personally (1) suffered some actual or threatened injury; (2) that injury can fairly be traced to the challenged action of the defendant; and (3) that the injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable decision. 15 Footnote Americans United , 452 U.S. at 472 ; Allen v. Wright, 468 U.S. 737, 751 (1984) ; Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560–61 (1992) ; Monsanto C. v. Geerston Seed Farms , 561 U.S. ___, No. 09–475, slip op. (2010) . But see United States v. Parole Comm’n v. Geraghty, 445 U.S. 388 (1980) . Persons do not have standing to sue in federal court when they can only claim that they have an interest or have suffered an injury that is shared by all members of the public. 16 Footnote Schlesinger v. Reservists Comm. To Stop the War, 418 U.S. 208 (1974) . These factors are discussed at greater length in other Constitution Annotated essays.

Watch CBS News

What time the 2024 solar eclipse started, reached peak totality and ended

By Sarah Maddox

Updated on: April 9, 2024 / 5:04 AM EDT / CBS News

The 2024 solar eclipse will be visible across North America today. As the moon's position between the Earth and sun casts a shadow on North America, that shadow, or umbra, will travel along the surface from west to east at more than 1,500 miles per hour along the path of totality . 

That means the eclipse will start, peak and end at different times — as will the moments of total darkness along the path of totality — and the best time to view the eclipse depends on where you are located. Some places along the path will have more totality time than others.

In Texas, the south-central region had clouds in the forecast , but it was better to the northeast, according to the National Weather Service. The best eclipse viewing weather was expected in New Hampshire, Vermont and Maine, as well as in Canada's New Brunswick and Newfoundland.

What time does the 2024 total solar eclipse start?

The total solar eclipse will emerge over the South Pacific Ocean before the shadow falls across North America, beginning in parts of Mexico. The path of totality , where onlookers can witness the moon fully blocking the sun (through eclipse viewing glasses for safety ), is expected to first make landfall near the city of Mazatlán around 9:51 a.m. MT. 

The total solar eclipse will cross over the U.S.-Mexico border into Texas, where it will emerge over Eagle Pass at 12:10 p.m. CT and then peak at about 1:27 p.m. CT.

In Dallas, NASA data shows the partial eclipse will first become visible at 12:23 p.m. CT and peak at 1:40 p.m. CT. The next states in the path of totality are Oklahoma and Arkansas, where the eclipse begins in Little Rock at 12:33 p.m. CT. 

Cleveland will see the beginning of the eclipse at 1:59 p.m. ET. Darkness will start spreading over the sky in Buffalo, New York, at 2:04 p.m. ET. Then, the eclipse will reach northwestern Vermont, including Burlington, at 2:14 p.m. ET. Parts of New Hampshire and Maine will also follow in the path of totality before the eclipse first reaches the Canadian mainland  at 3:13 p.m. ET.

Although the experience won't be exactly the same, viewers in all the contiguous U.S. states outside the path of totality will still be able to see a partial eclipse. Some places will see most of the sun blocked by the moon, including Washington, D.C., where the partial eclipse will start at 2:04 p.m. ET and peak at about 3:20 p.m. ET.

In Chicago, viewers can start viewing the partial eclipse at 12:51 p.m. CT, with the peak arriving at 2:07 p.m. CT.  In Detroit, viewers will be able to enjoy a near-total eclipse beginning at 1:58 p.m. ET and peaking at 3:14 p.m. ET.

New York City will also see a substantial partial eclipse, beginning at 2:10 p.m. ET and peaking around 3:25 p.m. ET.

In Boston it will begin at 2:16 p.m. ET and peak at about 3:29 p.m. ET.

The below table by NASA shows when the eclipse will start, peak and end in 13 cities along the eclipse's path.

What time will the solar eclipse reach peak totality?

Millions more people will have the chance to witness the total solar eclipse this year than during the last total solar eclipse , which was visible from the U.S. in 2017. 

The eclipse's peak will mean something different for cities within the path of totality and for those outside. Within the path of totality, darkness will fall for a few minutes. The longest will last more than 4 minutes, but most places will see between 3.5 and 4 minutes of totality. In cities experiencing a partial eclipse, a percentage of the sun will be obscured for more than two hours.

Mazatlán is set to experience totality at 11:07 am PT. Dallas will be able to see the moon fully cover the sun at 1:40 p.m. CT. Little Rock will start to see the full eclipse at 1:51 p.m. CT, Cleveland at 3:13 p.m. ET and Buffalo at 3:18 p.m. ET. Totality will reach Burlington at 3:26 p.m. ET before moving into the remaining states and reaching Canada around 4:25 p.m.

Outside the path of totality, 87.4% of the sun will be eclipsed in Washington, D.C. at 3:20 p.m. ET, and Chicago will have maximum coverage of 93.9% at 2:07 p.m. CT. New York City is much closer to the path of totality this year than it was in 2017; it will see 89.6% coverage at 3:25 p.m. EDT. 

Detroit is another city that will encounter a near-total eclipse, with 99.2% maximum coverage at 3:14 p.m. ET. Boston will see 92.4% coverage at 3:29 p.m. ET.

What time will the solar eclipse end?

The eclipse will leave continental North America from Newfoundland, Canada, at 5:16 p.m. NT, according to NASA.

At the beginning of the path of totality in Mazatlán, the eclipse will be over by 12:32 p.m. PT, and it will leave Dallas at 3:02 p.m. CT. The eclipse will end in Little Rock at 3:11 p.m. CT, Cleveland at 4:29 p.m. CDT and Buffalo at 4:32 p.m. ET. Burlington won't be far behind, with the eclipse concluding at 4:37 p.m. ET.

Meanwhile, the viewing will end in Chicago at 3:21 p.m. CT, Washington, D.C. at 4:32 p.m. ET, and New York City at 4:36 p.m. ET. 

In Detroit, the partial eclipse will disappear at 4:27 p.m. ET, and in Boston, it will be over at 4:39 p.m. ET.

How long will the eclipse last in total?

The total solar eclipse will begin in Mexico at 11:07 a.m. PT and leave continental North America at 5:16 p.m. NT. From the time the partial eclipse first appears on Earth to its final glimpses before disappearing thousands of miles away, the celestial show will dazzle viewers for about 5 hours, according to timeanddate.com . 

The length of the total solar eclipse at points along the path depends on the viewing location. The longest will be 4 minutes and 28 seconds, northwest of Torreón, Mexico. Near the center of the path, totality takes place for the longest periods of time, according to NASA.

Spectators will observe totality for much longer today than during the 2017 eclipse , when the longest stretch of totality was 2 minutes and 32 seconds.

The moon's shadow seen on Earth today, called the umbra, travels at more than 1,500 miles per hour, according to NASA. It would move even more quickly if the Earth rotated in the opposite direction.

What is the longest a solar eclipse has ever lasted?

The longest known totality was 7 minutes and 28 seconds in 743 B.C. However, NASA says this record will be broken in 2186 with a 7 minute, 29 second total solar eclipse. The next total solar eclipse visible from parts of the U.S. won't happen until Aug. 23, 2044.

Sarah Maddox has been with CBS News since 2019. She works as an associate producer for CBS News Live.

More from CBS News

Bill Nye shares tips for eclipse: "Be in the moment"

What if mortgage rates don't fall? 3 things buyers can do this spring

CD grace periods: Everything savers should know

New WIC rules include more money for fruits and vegetables

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

the new new world

What Chinese Outrage Over ‘3 Body Problem’ Says About China

The Netflix series showcases one of the country’s most successful works of culture. Instead of demonstrating pride, social media is condemning it.

The first five minutes of the Netflix series “ 3 Body Problem ” were hard to watch.

I tried not to shut my eyes at the coldblooded beating of a physics professor at the height of the Cultural Revolution in 1967. By the end of it, he was dead, with blood and gruesome wounds all over his head and body. His daughter, also a physicist, watched the public execution. She went on to lose hope in humanity.

I made myself sit through this violent scene. I have never seen what was known as a struggle session depicted blow by blow on the screen. I also felt compelled to watch it because of how the series, a Netflix adaptation of China’s most celebrated works of science fiction, has been received in China.

On Chinese social media platforms, commenters objected that the series is not set entirely in China; that the main characters are not all Chinese but instead racially diverse; that one of the main characters has been switched from a man to a woman and, in their eyes, the actress was not pretty enough. They cited many other supposed flaws.

“The Three-Body Problem,” an apocalyptic trilogy about humanity’s reactions to a coming alien invasion that sold millions of copies in Chinese and more than a dozen other languages, is one of the best-known Chinese novels in the world published in the past few decades. Barack Obama is a fan. China doesn’t have many such hugely successful cultural exports.

Instead of pride and celebration, the Netflix series has been met with anger, sneer and suspicion in China. The reactions show how years of censorship and indoctrination have shaped the public perspectives of China’s relations with the outside world. They don’t take pride where it’s due and take offense too easily. They also take entertainment too seriously and history and politics too lightly. The years of Chinese censorship have also muted the people’s grasp of what happened in the Cultural Revolution.

Some commenters said that the series got made mainly because Netflix, or rather the West, wanted to demonize China by showing the political violence during the Cultural Revolution, which was one of the darkest periods in the history of the People’s Republic of China.

“Netflix is just pandering to Western tastes, especially in the opening scene,” said one person on the social media platform Weibo.

The blockbuster books and their author, Liu Cixin, have a cultlike following in China. That’s not surprising because Chinese society, from senior leadership, scientists, entrepreneurs to people on the street, is steeped in techno utopianism.

The English translation of the first volume was published in the United States in 2014. The same year, the e-commerce giant Alibaba pulled off a blockbuster initial public offering in New York, and the world started viewing China as an emerging tech and manufacturing power instead of just a copycat of Western technologies.

The Netflix series portrays China as a scientific giant, speaking to the universe. Mr. Liu’s vast imagination and his probing of the nature of good and evil are key to his books’ success.

He doesn’t seem to view China or even the Earth as exceptional. In a television interview in 2022, he said that the crises described in any science fiction novel are shared “by humanity as a whole.” He added, “From the perspective of the universe, we are all part of a whole.”

The Netflix series adopted a Chinese word “Santi,” or three body, as the alien’s name. The book’s English translation uses “Trisolarian.” When was the last time that a Chinese word made it into the global pop culture? But few people celebrated that on Chinese social media.

Instead, many comments zeroed in on how unflatteringly China is portrayed and how few Chinese elements are included in the series. Netflix isn’t available in China but viewers flocked to see pirated versions of “3 Body Problem.”

The story in the Netflix version takes place mainly in Britain, not Beijing. The actors are racially diverse, including Latino, Black, white, South Asian and Chinese. Some comments call the diverse casting “American-style political correctness,” while others question why the series casts ethnic Chinese only as villains or poor people, which is not true.

If their main complaint about the Netflix adaptation is that the creators took too much liberty with the plot and the main characters, their other major complaint is that the opening scene about the Cultural Revolution is too truthful or too violent.

Some doubted the necessity of mentioning the political event at all. Others accused the show of exaggerating the level of violence in the struggle session.

Scholars believe that 1.5 million to eight million people died in “abnormal deaths” in the decade from 1966 to 1976, while more than 100 million Chinese were affected by the period’s upheaval.

Any discussion of the Cultural Revolution , a political movement that Mao Zedong started in 1966 to reassert authority by setting radical youths against those in charge, is heavily censored in China. Mr. Liu, the author, had to move the depiction of the struggle session from the beginning of the first volume to the middle because his editor was worried it couldn’t get past the censors. The English translation opened with the scene, with Mr. Liu’s approval.

“The Cultural Revolution appears because it’s essential to the plot,” Mr. Liu told my colleague Alexandra Alter in 2019. “The protagonist needs to have total despair in humanity.”

With the topic increasingly taboo, it’s hard to imagine that Mr. Liu would be able to publish a book with that premise now.

In 2007, the independent filmmaker Hu Jie made a documentary about Bian Zhongyun, a vice principal of a middle school in Beijing who was among the first to be beaten to death by the Red Guards. Her husband took photos of her naked, battered body, and Mr. Hu used them at the start of his documentary. The opening scene of “3 Body Problem” reminded me a great deal of it. Mr. Hu’s movie was never publicly screened in China.

Someone on social media recently reposted an old article about Ye Qisong, one of the founders of the study of physics in modern China. In 1967, around the time that the struggle session of the series took place, Mr. Ye, who shared the same family name of the physicist in the opening scene, was detained, beaten and forced to confess crimes he didn’t commit. He went crazy and wandered the streets in Beijing, begging for food and money. The article was circulated widely online before it was censored.

There’s a cottage industry of making videos on Chinese social media about “The Three Body Problem.” But few dare to address what led the daughter, a physicist, to invite the aliens to invade the Earth. A video with more than five million views on the website Baidu referred to the Cultural Revolution as “the red period” without explaining what happened. Another video with more than eight million views on the video site Bilibili called it “the what you know event.”

It's not surprising that fans of the book may have heard of the Cultural Revolution, but they don’t have a concrete idea about the atrocities that the Communist Party and some ordinary Chinese committed. That’s why the reactions to the Netflix series are concerning to some Chinese.

A human rights lawyer posted on WeChat that because of his age, he saw some struggle sessions when he was a child. “If I lived a bit longer, I might even get to experience it firsthand,” he wrote. “It’s not called reincarnation. It’s called history.”

Li Yuan writes the New New World column , which focuses on the intersection of technology, business and politics in China and across Asia. More about Li Yuan

This diagram shows what happens during a total solar eclipse

• A total solar eclipse will be visible from Texas to Maine on Monday.
• This cosmic event occurs when the Earth, sun, and moon align perfectly.
• One diagram shows how a total solar eclipse works, and why it darkens the sky in the middle of the day.

A total solar eclipse will turn afternoon skies dark from Texas to Maine on Monday.

During the eclipse, the moon will cross between the Earth and the sun, completely blocking out the sun's light. If you're in the moon's shadow, the sky will go dark for about three to four minutes, depending on your location.

It's the climax of a cosmic dance between our planet , the moon, and the sun.

What causes a total solar eclipse

During a total solar eclipse, three key conditions happen at the same time: The moon is in the "new moon" phase; the moon crosses the plane of the Earth's orbit ; and the moon is at its closest point to Earth in its orbit.

When those conditions are just right, the Earth, sun, and moon line up. This diagram shows how that looks:

Then, if you're in the path of totality — which is basically the center of the moon's shadow, called the umbra — the moon appears to obscure the sun.

If you're in the penumbra — the outer region of the moon's shadow — you'll see a partial solar eclipse , where the moon appears to partially overlap the sun.

A total solar eclipse happens somewhere on Earth about every 18 months on average. It's rare for one to occur in any single place, though, because of the complex movements of the Earth and moon.

The moon orbits Earth every 29.5 days, while Earth has its own orbit around the sun. The moon's orbit is tilted about five degrees, which is large enough to keep its shadow off the Earth and the Earth's shadow off the moon most of the time.

There are two points — called nodes — where the moon's orbit crosses the Earth's plane. In the diagram above, the moon is lined up on a node.

Related stories

The moon aligns with the nodes and the sun about twice per year, which is how we get eclipses. A solar eclipse happens when the moon is between the Earth and sun. A lunar eclipse happens when the moon is on the other side of the Earth, farthest from the sun.

What the total solar eclipse will look like

In the path of totality on Monday, where the moon's umbra falls over Earth, the total solar eclipse will have 10 distinct phases , each with different amounts of the sun visible from the ground.

The phenomenon kicks off with what's called first contact, when the moon starts to pass across the sun. After about an hour, the moon will almost completely mask the sun, and you'll start to see a bright light radiate out of the sliver of remaining sun, known as the "diamond ring."

Then the moon will fully eclipse the sun, turning the sky dark in the middle of the day.

During totality only the sun's outermost atmosphere, called the corona, will be visible glowing around the dark disc of the moon.

After that, the moon will continue to travel across the sky to form another crescent. The eclipse ends when the moon ceases to cover the sun.

Types of solar eclipses

There are three types of solar eclipses .

Total solar eclipses, like this one, occur when the moon appears to completely cover the sun. If the moon only somewhat covers the sun, that's a partial eclipse . Many people who are near the path of totality, but not in it, on Monday will see a partial eclipse.

The third type, an annular eclipse , occurs when the moon is too far from Earth to fully block out the sun from our perspective. The outer edge of the sun remains visible as a bright ring around the moon.

A total solar eclipse is considered the most spectacular. Globally, only about a third of all solar eclipses are total.

The next total solar eclipse in the contiguous US will be in 2044.

How to watch the eclipse

If you plan to watch the eclipse, make sure you are wearing ISO-certified eclipse glasses . These are 1,000 times darker than regular sunglasses. Without them, staring at the sun could damage your eyes.

The only safe time to look at the eclipse without glasses is during totality.

Leanna Garfield and Anaele Pelisson contributed to an earlier version of this post .

Watch: Why the sun has two giant holes, and what that means for Earth

• Main content

The total solar eclipse 2024 is happening today! Here's what you need to know

Millions are ready to watch  —  are you?

It's the day we've all been waiting for! Total solar eclipse 2024 is finally here. Today (April 8) a total solar eclipse will sweep across North America from Mexico, through 15 U.S. States and up through Canada. For viewers inside the path of totality, the moon will completely cover the sun, darkening the sky and revealing our star's hidden outer atmosphere.

You can keep up to date with the latest eclipse content on our eclipse live blog and watch all the total eclipse action unfold live here on Space.com courtesy of NASA. Our livestream coverage begins at 1 p.m. EDT (1700 GMT). 

If you capture a great photo of the solar eclipse and would like to share it with us please email it to [email protected] . 

Related: 10 things you probably didn't know about the total solar eclipse 2024

Every U.S. State will experience at least a partial solar eclipse today. If you want to check what time you'll be able to see the solar eclipse and find out what it may look like from your location check out this great interactive map from NASA . 

A total solar eclipse occurs when the moon passes directly between the sun and Earth, casting a shadow on our planet. It appears almost exactly the same size as our sun and for those witnessing the event from the path of totality, it will completely cover the sun's visible disk.

Last minute preparations  

If you haven't been able to get hold of a pair of eclipse glasses and are looking for an easy way to still view the solar eclipse safely we have a list of some alternative ways to view the eclipse with items from around the home . 

Get the Space.com Newsletter

Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!

Remember NEVER look directly at the sun. To safely view all of this event, you must use solar glasses or filters. Only those in the path of totality will be able to remove them briefly to see the sun's corona with their naked eyes. Those not in the path of totality must keep them on the entire time. 

Everyone observing the partial phases of this eclipse — and for those outside the path of totality, that's the entire event — will need to wear solar eclipse glasses while cameras, telescopes and binoculars will need solar filters placed in front of their lenses. 

Our how to observe the sun safely guide tells you everything you need to know about safe solar observations. 

Eclipse timings

Submit your photos! If you capture a photo of the April 8 total solar eclipse or any of these strange effects and would like to share it with Space.com's readers, send photos, videos, comments, and your name, location and content usage permission release to [email protected].

Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: [email protected].

Daisy Dobrijevic joined Space.com in February 2022 having previously worked for our sister publication All About Space magazine as a staff writer. Before joining us, Daisy completed an editorial internship with the BBC Sky at Night Magazine and worked at the National Space Centre in Leicester, U.K., where she enjoyed communicating space science to the public. In 2021, Daisy completed a PhD in plant physiology and also holds a Master's in Environmental Science, she is currently based in Nottingham, U.K. Daisy is passionate about all things space, with a penchant for solar activity and space weather. She has a strong interest in astrotourism and loves nothing more than a good northern lights chase! 

Satellite views of solar eclipse 2024: See the moon's shadow race across North America (video, photos)

Total solar eclipse 2024: Live updates

SpaceX launches 23 Starlink satellites in nighttime liftoff (photos)

• COLGeek Skies good, so far. Telescope setup and looked at sun spots a bit already. I'm kicking myself for not getting a CCD. Hoping for a good viewing today. Reply
• View All 1 Comment

Most Popular

By Stefanie Waldek April 09, 2024

By Daisy Dobrijevic April 08, 2024

By Alexander Cox April 08, 2024

By Monisha Ravisetti April 08, 2024

By Tariq Malik April 08, 2024

By Kimberly H. Breuer April 07, 2024

By Pedro Braganca April 07, 2024

By Mike Wall April 07, 2024

By Jeff Spry April 07, 2024

• 2 Satellite views of solar eclipse 2024: See the moon's shadow race across North America (video, photos)
• 3 Total solar eclipse 2024: Live updates
• 4 These solar eclipse 2024 photos from our readers are absolutely amazing (images, video)
• 5 I proposed to my fiancée under the diamond ring of the 2024 total solar eclipse. (She said 'Yes!')

Miss Manners: Is it ever too late to send a thank you note?

Dear Miss Manners: I’m a terrible procrastinator. I have procrastinated sending thank-you letters for multiple years for multiple events (our wedding, my baby shower, our child’s birthday parties). The worst offense is our wedding, five years ago.

Is it ever too late to send a thank-you letter? Could I send a single thank-you now, for the gifts and attendance to all these events?

Yes, but it had better be a good one. Being a procrastinator is not a decent excuse, and Miss Manners is not going to let you off the hook by declaring a statute of limitations.

What you need to atone for is not postponement so much as blatantly apparent ingratitude. So you need to name and praise your use of each of these presents (at least vaguely, if you can’t remember what they were) and also express appreciation for your benefactors’ continued thoughtfulness and generosity over the years. Yes, this will be a lot of work. But when you do not pay a debt when it is due, it accrues interest.

Dear Miss Manners: A few months ago, I was diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer. I had many friends, family members and colleagues send gifts, cards, emails and texts, for which I know that I am very, very lucky.

Most of these occurred in the first month after my diagnosis, which was a flurry of tests, procedures and doctor’s appointments. I tried to keep up with sending thank-you notes or responding to emails, but it was quite overwhelming. Unfortunately, many slipped through the cracks. Now a couple months have passed. What is the etiquette for sending thanks or responding at this point?

Sadly, you do have a legitimate excuse. Etiquette is not so heartless as to discount genuinely overwhelming circumstances.

Still, you do want to show your appreciation. Miss Manners reminds you that some of those kind people will surely have asked what they can do to help. One or more of them could make your task easier by taking dictation from you to write on your behalf.

Dear Miss Manners: I have noticed that mourners now applaud at funerals after a memorial speech. Maybe I am old-school, but I do not remember this being done until lately. I would personally prefer no applause.

Whether this was started by those who grew up on a parental chorus of “Good job!” for every action or is just part of America’s orientation toward show business, Miss Manners cannot say. But yes, solemn occasions are now often punctuated by applause. To applaud a funeral tribute does take the focus from honoring the deceased to congratulating the speaker. Even applauding music that is a formal part of religious services suggests that it is done to please an audience, not to glorify God.

So Miss Manners agrees with you, but sees little hope of convincing others that thoughtful silence can be more meaningful than noise.

New Miss Manners columns are posted Monday through Saturday on washingtonpost.com/advice . You can send questions to Miss Manners at her website, missmanners.com . You can also follow her @RealMissManners.

© 2024 Judith Martin

More from Advice

Ask Sahaj: My cousin was my bestie. She dropped me ‘like a hot potato.’

Meghan Leahy: Our nephew is causing problems with our child. How do we set boundaries?

Miss Manners: Best not to ask why a guest said ‘no’

Carolyn Hax: Even friends don’t require a debriefing on a touchy subject

Ask Amy: Wife’s recovered memory disrupts marriage

Apple Vision Pro is already making the Meta Quest 3 better

You don’t need to own an Apple Vision Pro to appreciate it. Just having competition from the high end is pushing Meta to improve its mainstream mixed reality headset.

Meta Quest 3 hit the market last year for $499. That’s $3000 shy of Vision Pro, but with the same goal of colorized passthrough for mixed reality. The only problem was that Meta’s version of passthrough was hardly comparable to Apple’s. My own evaluation is that Meta Quest 3 passthrough is usable but not convincing.

That appears to be changing now. In a Quest software update called v64, Meta says that it has improved passthrough quality for the Meta Quest 3 headset . Here’s a summary from the release notes:

Passthrough is the fundamental mixed reality capability that allows users to comfortably view and interact with the physical world while wearing a headset. […] Improved resolution We have improved the perceived resolution for passthrough by optimizing the passthrough pipeline. This makes it easier for users to see finer details and read smaller text in the real world – such as notifications on a smartphone screen. Improved image quality We have fine tuned the camera processing pipeline to improve color, exposure, contrast and dynamic range in passthrough. This makes color passthrough better match the real world. We have also reduced graininess (aka image noise) in lower light conditions making for an overall more comfortable passthrough experience in a range of lighting conditions.

Unlike Apple’s visionOS software updates, Meta stages its Meta software updates so that a bad release doesn’t reach everyone on day one. For this reason, I haven’t experienced Meta’s improved version of passthrough yet.

However, Quest 3 users online have been praising it as a significant enhancement that takes inspiration from Apple Vision Pro.

The verdict seems to be that Meta has learned from the Apple approach and improved clarity. The cost of doing so, however, seems to be grainier visuals during motion. That tradeoff for more clarity when stationary and some distortion during motion seems like the right call for passthrough.

Headset competition ahead

What’s also clear is that Apple Vision Pro is actively pushing Meta to improve its headsets. While improved passthrough (and laying down mode ) are the highlights of this month, Meta has openly discussed major OS overhauls to come that will be more visionOS-like when it comes to multitasking.

As long as Apple Vision Pro is priced in the money-is-no-object range, Meta should be comfortable with AVP being a benchmark in quality but not a competitor in the same slice of the market. However, a more affordable Apple Vision is almost inevitable. That’s what Meta has to race to compete against.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Check out 9to5Mac on YouTube for more Apple news:

Zac covers Apple news, hosts the 9to5Mac Happy Hour podcast, and created SpaceExplored.com.