Read the following text. Following the title of the text brainstorm words you expect to find in it. Write the vocabulary list of possible words that you could find in that text.

Make sure you understand the meaning of the following words and word-combinations:

a central federal government

individual governments

complete judicial system

to share some common characteristics.

criminal cases

private civil disputes

family law matters

such as divorce and adoption, etc. The framers of the Constitution

judiciary

to establish to appoint

to confirm

to remove smb from the office

to prevent

in favor of

to require

plaintiff

concurrent

admiralty and maritime law

bankruptcy

trademark

copyright law

writ of certiorari

a significant issue

total discretion

 The American Judicial System

      The United States is a federal system, with a central federal government and individual governments for each of the fifty states.  As with the other branches of government, each of the states has their own complete judicial system (state courts) as does the United States itself (federal courts). Although there are important differences between the federal courts and between the various state court systems, they do share some common characteristics.

Federal Courts

      At the time of the adoption of the United States Constitution in 1789, each of the original thirteen states had a fully functioning judicial system.  These state courts handled all judicial matters, such as criminal cases, private civil disputes, and family law matters such as divorce and adoption, etc. The framers of the Constitution agreed, however, that a national judiciary was also necessary, at the very least a Supreme Court, which could be the final arbiter on matters of federal law. Therefore, Article III of the Constitution provides for a Supreme Court and gives Congress the power to establish other, lower courts.

As one of its initial acts, the first Congress established not only the Supreme Court, but also a system of trial courts (District Courts) and intermediate Appeals Courts (Courts of Appeal). The Supreme Court has nine justices.  At present, the United States is divided into 91 districts, each with a District Court staffed by between two and 28 judges. There are 13 Courts of Appeal with between six and 28 judges each. Courts of Appeal normally sit in panels of three judges to hear cases.

The United States Constitution specifies the method of selection and terms of office for all federal judges.  These methods were chosen to make federal judges as independent of the other branches of government and of public pressure as possible.  Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States, and must be confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate.  They serve for life, may not have their salaries reduced, and may only be removed from office for serious offenses through the impeachment process. This requires impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by a two-thirds vote of the Senate.  In more than two hundred years, only seven federal judges have been removed from office.

The subject-matter jurisdiction of the Federal courts is limited by Article III of the Constitution. Unlike state courts, which are usually courts of general jurisdiction (they can hear most kinds of cases) federal courts may only hear cases that are listed in Article III as within “the judicial power of the United States.”  The framers included only such cases in which it was felt that there was a special need for a federal, as opposed to a state court.

       Perhaps the most important grant of jurisdiction today is over cases “arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States” (often called “federal question” jurisdiction). This gives federal courts the power to interpret and enforce the United States Constitution and all laws passed by Congress.  This guarantees that all citizens will enjoy the same Constitutional rights as citizens in other states.

      Another, more controversial grant of jurisdiction to the federal courts is known as “diversity jurisdiction.” This applies to controversies between citizens of different states and controversies between citizens of the United States and citizens of a foreign country. The main purpose of this grant of jurisdiction is to prevent bias against an out-of-state party in favor of an in-state party.  The fact that federal judges are appointed by the President and are not subject to reelection is thought to minimize the possibility of local bias. Also, in diversity cases, the governing substantive law will be state law, rather than federal law.  Federal judges are required by the Constitution to apply state law where applicable. 

Most grants of jurisdiction to the federal courts, including federal question and diversity, are concurrent, rather than exclusive.  This means that the plaintiffs may bring such cases in either a federal or state court.  It may happen, therefore, that a case raising a constitutional claim or based on a federal statute may end up in state court.  Just as a federal judge may have to apply state law in a diversity case, a state judge may have to apply federal law.  All judges, therefore, must be familiar with both federal and state law.

In concurrent jurisdiction cases, plaintiff has the original choice of whether to bring the case in federal or state court.  If plaintiff properly brings the case in federal court, then the defendant may not transfer it to state court.  If, however, plaintiff chooses to bring a case over which both the state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction in a state court, the defendant may have the case transferred, or “removed” to federal court.  If neither party wants it heard in federal court, then it remains in state court.

In certain cases, Congress has chosen to make federal jurisdiction exclusive, rather than concurrent.  These cases may only be brought and heard in federal court.  This is usually reserved for situations where Congress wants the law decided only by federal courts to provide more uniformity than if the case might be heard in any one of fifty state courts.  Examples of grants of exclusive jurisdiction are cases involving admiralty and maritime law, bankruptcy, and trademark and copyright law.

With few exceptions, once a case starts in either state or federal court, the case remains in that court system throughout, including on appeal.  Cases in federal court may be appealed first to the federal Court of Appeals for that particular circuit, and then by writ of certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.  Cases heard in a state court must be appealed through the state court system (usually to an intermediate appellate court and then to the state supreme court).  Only if a case in state court contains a significant issue of federal law may it be appealed to the United States Supreme Court after being heard by the state supreme court.

All appeals to the United States Supreme Court, whether from a state Supreme Court or from a federal Court of Appeals, are discretionary.  The person bringing the appeal (called the petitioner) files a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court.  The Court has total discretion as to whether it wants to hear a particular case or not.  It takes four votes from the nine justices to grant the writ of certiorari and hear the case.  The Court usually bases its decision on the importance of the legal issue involved to the country as a whole.

Questions to discuss:

1. What are two systems of the courts in the USA?
2. What is the main difference between the federal courts and various state court systems?
3. Do they have any common characteristics?
4. When was American constitution adopted?
5. What courts were established by the first Constitution?
6. What is the number of courts today?
7. What are the methods of selection and terms of office for all federal judges?
8. Do state judges serve for life?
9. Can their salaries be reduced?
10. What guarantees that all citizens will enjoy the same Constitutional rights as citizens in other states?
11. What is “diversity jurisdiction”?
12. What is the main purpose of this grant of jurisdiction?
13. Who may have to apply state law in a diversity case?
14. Must all judges be familiar with both federal and state law?
15. What cases may only be brought and heard in federal court?
16. May Cases in federal court be appealed to the federal Court of Appeals?
17. The Court usually bases its decision on the importance of the legal issue involved to the country as a whole, does not it?