American Judicial Structure Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

American Judicial Structure - Essay Example Finally, the federal courts are also limited by hierarchal considerations. There are trial courts, designated Federal District Courts, intermediate courts of appeal, and the United States Supreme Court. As one moves up the hierarchy, the federal courts have increasing discretion to hear or to reject cases and controversies. To be sure, the United States Supreme Court actually accepts very few of the cases submitted to it for resolution. The findings and holdings of the courts lower in the hierarchy thus become final and binding. In sum, although the federal courts are empowered to hear and to decide many types of cases there are very real limitations. These limitations, or gaps, are in large part filled by the separate state court systems. 1.2 State Courts State courts are vested with the responsibility of deciding conflicts and controversies under a state's constitution and other laws. There are similarities with the federal system to the extant that state courts are also limited by geographical, subject matter, and hierarchal considerations. The trial courts tend to be divided into courts of limited jurisdiction and general jurisdiction. Local governments tend to create and administer the trial courts of limited jurisdiction whereas states control and administer the trial courts of general jurisdiction. The limited jurisdiction courts are extraordinarily numerous, more than 13,500 in the United States (Neubauer, 2005: 82), and are excluded from the scope of this essay. From the strict point of view of the state, courts are divided into trial courts, appellate courts, and a supreme court. The laws may differ significantly from federal laws to the extant that states may set higher safeguards than those established in the Constitution.. . State courts are vested with the responsibility of deciding conflicts and controversies under a state’s constitution and other laws. There are similarities with the federal system to the extent that state courts are also limited by geographical, subject matter, and hierarchal considerations. The trial courts tend to be divided into courts of limited jurisdiction and general jurisdiction. Local governments tend to create and administer the trial courts of limited jurisdiction whereas states control and administer the trial courts of general jurisdiction. The limited jurisdiction courts are extraordinarily numerous, more than 13,500 in the US, and are excluded from the scope of this essay. From the strict point of view of the state, courts are divided into trial courts, appellate courts, and a supreme court. The laws may differ significantly from federal laws to the extent that states may set higher safeguards than those established in the Constitution or in federal laws. In add ition, federal legislators are empowered to pass federal laws which, in effect, preempt contradictory state laws. This preemption, though sometimes controversial, functions to preserve harmony in the administration of the separate judicial systems. There is, nonetheless, the existence of conflict and it becomes extremely important to draw bright lines separating the two judicial systems. Otherwise, the potential for conflict and court shopping would become a big problem. For the most part, the judicial systems have been kept separate.