Federal Courts Vs State Courts

2215 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Similarities between the state and federal courts

“The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States. It creates a federal system of government in which power is shared between the federal government and the state governments. Due to federalism, both the federal government and each of the state governments have their own court systems. Discover the differences in structure, judicial selection, and cases heard in both systems” (as cited in Comparing Federal & State Courts, n.d., p.1). There are many similarities and differences between the Federal and State Court Systems. This paper will discuss all components of the American Court System and Substantive Law, and the research presented to show both the State and Federal Court system levels in comparison and contrast. …show more content…

These Courts hear Misdemeanor offenses, for example, traffic cases, and civil cases that range in price up to $15,000. (Supreme Court, n.d., p.1). The amount of these court and justices also range on the jurisdiction and population of the state, and how many divisions each court has. The next court is the Court of Common Pleas. This court has 1 in each of the 88 counties. The functions of this court are as follows, (1) the General Division, which hears civil and criminal cases, and appeals from most administrative agencies, (2) Domestic Relations which hear cases concerning divorce and dissolutions, support and custody of children, (3) Juvenile Division hearing cases that involve minors, and lastly (4) Probate Division hears cases of descendants’ estate, mental illness, adoptions, and marriage licenses. (Supreme Court, n.d., …show more content…

& Cheeseman, H., 2014, p. 214). The most common forms of ADR are negotiation, mediation, conciliation, mini-trial, fact finding, and judicial referee. (Goldman, T. & Cheeseman, H., 2014, p. 214). The most common forms of ADR are Arbitration and Mediation. Arbitration is defined as “a form of ADR in which the parties choose an impartial third party to hear and decide the dispute. This can be both binding and non-binding” (as cited in Goldman, T. & Cheeseman, H., 2014, p. 215). Mediation is the other most common form defined as “a form a negotiation in which a neutral third party assists the disputing parties in aching a settlement of their dispute” (as cited in Goldman, T. & Cheeseman, H., 2014, p.

Show More
Related

  • Dual Court System Q&A

    1218 Words  | 3 Pages

    among the nation's founders about the need for individual states to retain significant legislative authority and judicial autonomy separate from federal control. The reason why we have a dual-court system is, back then; new states joining the union were assured of limited federal intervention into local affairs. The state legislatures were free to create laws, and state court systems were needed to hear cases in which violations of those laws occurred. Today, however, state courts do not hear cases involving alleged violations of federal law, nor do federal courts involve themselves in deciding issues of state law unless there is a conflict between local or state statues and federal constitutional guarantees. When that happens, claimed violations of federal due process guarantees especially those found in the Bill of Rights.

    Read More

  • Structure of American and California Governments

    9636 Words  | 20 Pages

    The United States of America is one of the most powerful nation-states in the world today. The framers of the American Constitution spent a great deal of time and effort into making sure this power wasn’t too centralized in one aspect of the government. They created three branches of government to help maintain a checks and balance system. In this paper I will discuss these three branches, the legislative, the executive, and the judicial, for both the state and federal level.

    Read More

  • The Key to the Protection Against Tyranny in the American Constitution

    1402 Words  | 3 Pages

    In the Constitution, central and state governments received power that was shared and split in a federalist system, preventing tyranny of one over the other. Madison put forward his idea of federalism in Federalist Paper #51. “...the power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct governments...The different governments will each control each other, at the same time each will be controlled by itself” (Doc. A). A Venn diagram derived from the Constitution shows that the central government controlled national affairs such as war, foreign trade, and foreign relations, and states controlled internal affairs such as establishing public services and regulating in-state businesses. The shared powers included taxes, loans, and laws. Despite Madison’s bias towards the federalist system (rarely does one truly attack one’s own political treatise within it) in his quote, the apportioning of powers shows that neither the central or st...

    Read More

  • Georgia State Court System

    1956 Words  | 4 Pages

    Court systems between states can vary significantly while maintaining the same general functions. Georgia state court structure is set up to handle a large number of proceedings. To understand how the system is able to accommodate the numerous counties and the growing population we must consider the types of courts that are in place, the process of putting judges into place, and how the jury is chosen to facilitate the courts.

    Read More

  • Federal Courts Vs State Courts Essay

    692 Words  | 2 Pages

    How are federal courts of general jurisdiction different from state courts of general jurisdiction? State courts deal with every day cases dealing with state laws and regulations. They can vary from criminal procedures in civil or family cases, to lower offenses, such as parking tickets. They tend to be specific to the laws of each state, as the state is allowed to form their own set of laws to keep their residents “free and treat them equally”. Federal courts on the other hand, hear criminal that violate the US Constitution and/or cases that cross state lines , along with civil cases or bankruptcy cases. Both courts have appellate courts and interprets the laws (either state or federal laws). Federal court is more selective on the cases it

    Read More

  • Structure of the Federal Court System

    1304 Words  | 3 Pages

    Before the adoption of the United States Constitution, the U.S. was governed by the Articles of Confederation. These articles stated that almost every function of the government was chartered by the legislature known as Congress. There was no distinction between legislative or executive powers. This was a major shortcoming in how the United States was governed as many leaders became dissatisfied with how the government was structured by the Articles of Confederation. They felt that the government was too weak to effectively deal with the upcoming challenges. In 1787, an agreement was made by delegates at the Constitutional Convention that a national judiciary needed to be established. This agreement became known as The Constitution of the United States, which explicitly granted certain powers to each of the three branches of the federal government, while reserving other powers exclusively to the states or to the people as individuals. It is, in its own words, “the supreme Law of the Land” (Shmoop Editorial Team).

    Read More

  • Analysis: The Texas Court Structure

    311 Words  | 1 Pages

    The Texas Court Structure is a very complex concept. It consists of many appeals, and different types of courts. Although the structure is designed to keep things running smoothly, the system comes across as more rough than smooth. In the Texas court structure there are four levels of court that make the structure whole. The first is trial courts of limited jurisdiction, second is trial courts of general jurisdiction, third is appellate courts, and last but not least the state high court of last resort (Neubauer, 2015 pg.121). All these courts have different responsibilities that help make up what the Texas court structure is.

    Read More

  • Texas Courts

    2440 Words  | 5 Pages

    In 1822, Stephen F. Austin established one of the first courts in Texas and appointed a provisional justice of peace. Since Texas was a part of Mexico at the time, the Mexican governor replaced the justice of peace with three elected officials. (Utexas) Soon after Independence, the republic of Texas under the 1836 Constitution, established a supreme court and allowed Congress to create inferior courts. Judges in such courts were to be elected by Congress. Counties, at the time, had County and Justice of Peace courts, whose judges were popularly elected. With the entrance of Texas into the Union and the adoption of numerous constitutions during the period, Texas retained a similar judicial structure. The current 1876 Constitution created a Supreme Court with appellate civil jurisdiction, the court of appeals, a large number of district, county and justice of peace courts and authorized the legislature to create further courts as necessary. Overtime, the legislature added a number of layers to the judicial system creating a vast and complex judicial system with numerous overlapping jurisdictions between courts. Due to the complicated nature of the current judicial system in Texas, this paper will start by giving a brief explanation of the structure of the current judicial system in Texas and will move on by identifying some strengths and weaknesses in the current system and the need for reforms, present numerous proposed reforms and analyzes why the proposed reforms failed.

    Read More

  • Essay On The Court System

    1988 Words  | 4 Pages

    Now, the district court system is the beginning step of the judicial system. A good amount of the case handled by the district court system is either criminal or civil trial cases. According to Roger Miller, “trial courts that have general jurisdiction as to the subject matter may be called county, district, superior, or circuit courts.” The majority of their cases are to be handled in-county first before proceeding further through the court system. Just as businesses and organizations have a chain-of-command or protocol system the government has the

    Read More

  • State Vs. Federal Government

    1032 Words  | 3 Pages

    Much like our federal government has its laws, each individual state creates its own internal laws and functions as its own, smaller government. The way in which a well-ran government runs may vary depending on which political party in office at the time, nationally and locally. Current events, wars, or changes in our country’s needs will affect the way a form of government functions .My state, Nebraska, is one of the more unique sets of governments out of the fifty states. Nebraska can be compared and contrasted to the federal government in so many ways. The laws and processes take the federal foundation combined with the ideas of the voters and statewide needs shape the way state officials go about these decisions, Whether a state is democratic or Republican in nature this term is a varying factor to how the offices are run.

    Read More

  • Specialized Drug Court Case Study

    1394 Words  | 3 Pages

    Relatively recently in history the development of specialized, or problem-oriented, courts have assumed a predominate role in multiple areas. Three of the major ones discussed here include drug, mental health, and domestic violence courts. In 1996, the American Bar Association provided their interpretation of specialization, stating:

    Read More

  • Legal Research, Writing, And Analysis

    1457 Words  | 3 Pages

    The US court system consists of a trial court, an appellate court, and a supreme or high court. The trial court is the first to hear the facts of a case and has original jurisdiction. The appellate court hears cases whose resolution is disputed by the losing party in the trial court. The supreme or high court hears cases whose outcome is disputed by the losing party in the appellate court. The supreme or high court chooses which cases warrant a hearing. The federal and the state court system have the same basic structure. Each consists of a trial court, an appellate court, and a supreme or high court. The Federal Court of Appeals has thirteen (13) circuits which cover most states except the District of Columbia. The federal system also has specialty courts such as the Court of Federal Claims and the United States Tax Court.

    Read More

  • Texas Supreme Court Case Study

    819 Words  | 2 Pages

    The Texas judiciary branch of its state government has not one but two Supreme Courts, the Court of Criminal Appeals and the Supreme Court of Texas. With the two separate Supreme Courts in its state government benefits are clearly displayed, but negative aspects are also clear here as well. I will describe what these two courts do for the state of Texas and I will tell of aspects I will leave be due to the benefits they provide but, I will also list changes to be made to fix the negative effects two Supreme Courts bring in this state.

    Read More

  • Essay On The American Court System

    2361 Words  | 5 Pages

    The American Court System is an important part of American history and one of the many assets that makes America stand out from other countries. It thrives for justice through its structured and organized court systems. The structures and organizations are widely influenced by both the State and U.S Constitution. The courts have important characters that used their knowledge and roles to aim for equality and justice. These court systems have been influenced since the beginning of the United State of America. Today, these systems and law continue to change and adapt in order to keep and protect the peoples’ rights.

    Read More

  • Advantages and Disadvantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution

    1901 Words  | 4 Pages

    ADR holds an extensive, easily influenced and diverging choice of processes for finding solutions for disputes which are personified by structured negotiation and consensus. It is regarded that arbitration is a familiar ADR technique, however, it is a more of a official adjudicative and adversary technique – initially a confidential litigation process – which has more commonality to litigation than the more original consensual processes which symbolise ADR. As simplified by Angyal (Alternative Dispute Resolution, 1987, p. 11):

    Read More

More about Federal Courts Vs State Courts

Open Document