American Legal System

Imagine you are the director of health information services for a medium-sized health care facility. Like many of your peers, you have contracted with an outside copying service to handle all requests for release of patient health information at your facility. You have learned that a lobbying organization for trial attorneys in your state is promoting legislation to place a cap on photocopying costs, which is significantly below the actual costs incurred as part of the contract. (Case Study, p. 20)

Courts are established social, political, and judicial institutions necessary for the manifestation of justice and the maintenance of law and order. The courts are part of the judicial branch of government, as outlined in Article III of the United States Constitution. Courts are the arenas in which the law is tried and applied. Judges are the presiding officers of the court. The United States Supreme Court is the most fundamental court because has "the authority to decide the constitutionality of federal laws and resolve other disputes over them," (United States Courts, 2012). This is true even though even though the court does not expressly enforce that law; enforcement is the province of the executive branch.

The courts play a huge role in the criminal justice system. The dual court system of the United States (U.S.) was established through the U.S. constitution. The court systems have a multiple purposes and elements of court. Federal and state court system is what makes up the dual court system of the U.S. Today the U.S. court system is what it is today because of previous legal codes, common law, and the precedent it played in the past. Making the U.S. court system a vital role in the criminal justice system..

Judges are a lot like police officers in that they hold a great amount of discretionary power in their courtrooms and their judgments. Judges are required to ensure that the accused is given a fair trial, while also ensuring that the best interest of the public is maintained. There is a great amount of pressure placed on judges today with excessive case loads and pressures from the media and other outside sources.

A significant similarity between both judicial systems is that they are both comprised of Trial and Appellate courts (a Court of Appeals and a Supreme Court). Trial courts are one of the lowest levels within both judicial systems, and they are

The United States court system is the institution were all the legal disputes in the american society are carryed out and resolved. However, one single court is not enough to resolve every single dispute in society and that is why the court system is made up of two different courts, the federal courts and the state courts. Moreover, the federal and state courts are made up of several divisions made to handle legal disputes differently depending on its seriousness. For example, the state court is made up of trial courts of limited jurisdiction and probate courts were cases and disputes originate and then move up to trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate apellate courts, and courts of last resort respectively depending on the case.In contrast, the federal court consists of district courts, territorial coutrs, tax court, court of international trade, claims court, court of veterans appeals, an courts of military review which then move on to courts of appeals respectively and may ultimately end up in the United States supreme court. In addition, cases from state court may also appeal into the federal court system but not the other way around.

Japan operates under the Eastern Asia legal tradition, whereas the United States operates under the common legal tradition. The differences are quite distinct. For example, according to Hahn (1983):

The American legal system provides a wide range of remedies that are not unlimited. In civil proceedings, most US courts have the power to choose a legal or equitable relief.

The United States system was established based on the justice system of England (Terrill, 2013). The procedures for criminal issues are very much like that of the United States. England practices common law, as is also the case in the United States (Terrill, 2013). English judges also practice the same due process as judges in America. Both countries criminal justice personal have formal training and education requirements (Terrill, 2013). There is a hierarchy of appeals very similar to both countries. The courts in both countries do not discriminate based on sex or religion and they also accept many forms of evidence in criminal justice cases. Both courts also use professional legal representation to defend and prosecute cases (Terrill, 2013). Another helpful similarity is that both countries utilize English as the primary language

There is legal traditions and there is legal systems. The main distinction between the two is procedure and attitudes about the laws. These are also broken down further to common law and civil law. Japan practices civil law which uses similar past cases to make a ruling, the judges are very active, jury trials are not common, and the court is inquisitorial. In the true Japanese fashion, their system incorporates the Anglo-American influence into their traditions. (Central Intelligence Agency, 2015). Japan focuses on legal tradition rather than a system, relying on the nature of the law and the role it plays in society based on the history of their country. The United States on the other hand, follows a legal system using common law. Common law uses a comprehensive collection of laws founded by prior decisions, the judges are impartial, trial juries are common, and the courts are adversarial. Both countries uses functional systems that work for their country as a whole. Because Japan is a social country, using legal tradition with a civil law system works because they do not have much need for trials due to their low incarceration rate and the active judges as well as the ability to look at similar cases to justify their decisions. The United States has a higher incarceration rate therefore jury trials are popular and the judges are determined to see justice served by following the laws put in place for that

Back in Middle Ages, the people of both Japan and Europe both dealt with the same problem: Feudalism. Overall both where very similar: both had a weak ruler and had someone under them ruling the country, both had a superior military and both economies depended on the people. Although as you get deeper you find out each is set up in its own way. Europe had kings that ruled the countries yet all followed what the Pope said. Japan had an emperor yet the shogun had all the power. Europe had knights that wore plated armor and had huge heavy broad swords. As for Japan had the samurai who wore leather and very little iron with very light swords called a katana. Europe’s economy depended on serfs and peasants while Japan’s depended on peasants and

The current Japanese justice system encompasses traditional Chinese law and some elements of the American justice system. This is not to say that the systems are similar, far from it. They are quite different due to the perception of the purpose of a justice system based on history and differences in culture.

The modern American judicial system was founded upon the morals and ideals brought forth in the Age of Reason and aided in providing legal protection to defendants on trial. As a nation with such strong religious ties, the Age of Reason brought forth new ideas and beliefs about government and lawmaking. Judiciary historical blunders such as the Salem Witch Trials paved the pathway for reform and aided in the formation of a new nation based on a set of written laws, customs, and regulations. The trials at Salem was founded upon the basis of the English Common Law system and the principles of the Age of Reason, and therefore affected our American Constitution and governmental practices.

As the world is moving forward, the need for unified law is increasing. That is why mixed legal jurisdictions are being able to accommodate modern laws into their own jurisdictions. Several jurisdictions in the world have mixed legal heritage, as different countries have ruled them but some of the countries tend to adopt laws from other jurisdictions. Philippines is country who has a very strong mixed legal heritage and Japan also adopted law from U.S.A.

Though, Japan has a high quality legal system, there are several issues that need to be addressed by the national government. These issues include: the unreasonable amount of discretionary powers prosecutors have and a shortage of lawyers.