Creating The Dual Court System

Imagine someone close that’s lived the straight and narrow to get where they are at. They are not perfect, maybe they could have put a little more time into their assignment at work or held their temper towards the grandpa driving too slow in front of them, but they’re just human living life the best way they know how. When a not-so-freak accident occurs and they find themselves behind bars imprisoned for the rest of their life. Sounds like the plot to “Shawshank Redemption” right? At this very instance, this story is being told of ordinary citizens behind the curtains of the New York Court System in rapidly increasing numbers. What may seem like an isolated incident is part of an ever-growing

Walter Chaplinsky, was utilizing an open spot to disperse leaflets against a specific religion. After a vast group obstructed the street and made a scene. Chaplinsky was captured by the police. The town marshal who had cautioned him already additionally met him and Chaplinsky called him “a damned Fascist” and a " god-damned racketeer " (Dorf & Michael, n,d).

The American legal system consists of two separate levels of court, defined as federalism, which together administer and enforce the laws in the United States. Federalism distributes the government powers between both the federal governments and the state governments, which ensures that the power of the national government is decentralized.

When the English were colonizing North America, they brought with them their laws. Being from the British Common Law system, the settlers understood how that system worked, so they modeled their own government using Common Law.

The U.S. Constitution created a strong government structure for the United States known as federalism. Both the federal and state governments must have their own court systems to apply and interpret their own specific laws. Both federal and state constitutions attempt to do this by specifically spelling out the jurisdiction of their own court systems. For example, U.S Constitution gives Congress the power to make uniform laws concerning bankruptcies, a state court would lack jurisdiction in this matter. Since the Constitution does not give the federal government authority in most matters concerning the regulation of the family, a federal court would lack jurisdiction in a divorce case. This is the main reason why there are two separate court systems in America. The federal court system deals with issues of law relating to those powers implicitly granted to them by the U.S. Constitution. The state court systems deal with issues of laws relating to those matters that the U.S. Constitution did not give to the federal government or deny to the states.

The Canadian court system, like anything made by man, has flaws. One of these flaws is the wrongful conviction of many men and women like David Milgaard and Steven Truscott. These innocent men spent years of their life behind bars because of the court system, serving the sentence for a crime they did not commit.

The Constrained Court model created by Gerald N. Rosenberg, proves that the courts are weak, powerless, and ineffective for change among race, class and gender ideologies.. Using Lisa Frohmann’s article, Convictability and Discordant Locales; in which she is ‘reproducing race, class and gender ideologies in Prosecutorial Decision-making’. Frohmann uses ‘discordant locales’ as a bridge to describe how prosecutors work in sexual assault cases. Rosenberg and Frohmann demonstrate that the courts are not effective unless they overcome these constraints, set in the constrained court model. According to Rosenberg and Frohmann social reform is nearly unachievable, through the district attorney and victim cross examination interview and jury assumptions. As Rosenberg specified in order to establish social reforms the following constraints; limited nature of constitutional rights lack of judicial independence, judiciary’s lack of power implantation and inability to develop appropriate policies need to be eradicated.

The Federal Court System is one of the most essential and significant functions to help settle a matter. Much work is involved in the application of a body of rules and principals of rulings. The path the Federal Courts have to take in order to be heard by the Supreme Court is a lengthy process. Given millions of disputes every year, it becomes impossible for the Federal Courts to be heard by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has jurisdictions that limit the variety of cases that are clearly defined in the Constitution. The Supreme Court has developed specific rules that within the jurisdictions will and will not hear. The Federal Court must show they have extreme and substantial evidence in the outcome of the case. In mootness, the Federal

Americans depend a great deal on entertainment to educate them about life. In several ways Americans live vicariously through the actors and actresses on television and believe themselves to learn many things from those actors and actresses. For example, many people have said they learned medical techniques by watching medical shows on television or believe they would know what to do in a medical emergency because they have seen it done on television. The same goes for Americans’ knowledge about Court hearings and the judicial system. Many things are done on television by actors playing lawyers or judges that are done just for the purpose of entertainment. “Reality-based” Court shows such as Judge Judy, People’s Court

However in the United States we have what is referred to as a dual court system. A dual court system can be defined as a judicial system comprising federal- and state- level judicial systems. A dual court system separates federal and state courts. According to the book a dual court system is advantageous and desirable because it is parallel to federalism. Federalism is a system of government where power is constitutionally divided between central governing body and various constituent units. In the United States, the federal government makes laws, but federalism also gives the state’s power to make their own laws (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). The Founding fathers saw it as a way to serve as check on an abusive or tyrannical government.

The dual court system is when there are different levels of courts (i.e. federal and state). This structure was established with the passage of the Judiciary Act of 1789. What happened was the Article III of the Constitution defines the Supreme Court as the highest judicial authority in the nation. However, when it comes to the structure, this was left up to Congress. In 1789, they established a series of different federal and state courts. The way it works is the federal courts have the power to review the decisions of state courts. The US Supreme Court is considered to be the final authority for interpreting the

Higher courts help to ensure that federal law carries out evenly among all states; a message of unity isn't sent when each state has its own exceptions to the law. Higher courts also look at the overall picture and the impact that the law has; the point is that federal law is the main concern, and state law doesn’t make much difference. Therefore, it is necessary for the higher courts to step in and ensure that any issues at a federal level reign the same in any court/lower judicial system.

Although state and federal courts are under the same branch, the judicial branch, when discussing the checks and balance system, the dual court system secures the hopes for limitations in the federal government’s power over the states. The dual court system was

So, what is the first priority that needs to be changed? Reforming the judicial system, which establishes the law enforcement, should eliminate social evils such as: drugs, alcohol, looting, and prostitutes. Beside, consolidating and expanding the powerful military are needed to protect the borders. In addition, enforcing strict punishment should be initiated for those who act with corrupt behaviors, in order to avoid fraudulence and dishonesty. According to the study of some researcher about corruption” Studies in five provinces found that 85 per cent of households perceived corruption in land management. Thirty-five per cent of businesses said that "gifts and informal payments" were standard aspects of doing business in Vietnam” (Duke Harris, 2012). For protection of one’s interest, all citizens should be able to have the right to vote for those who best represent. Establishing a democracy is necessary, instead of communist ruling, which should have been proscribed a long time ago. “Communism 's effects on economies across the globe have been particularly disastrous. By nationalizing productive assets and placing their management into the hands of officials who possess neither the competence nor the motivation to oversee them efficiently, Communism invariably causes productivity to decline precipitously. Moreover, it causes the people at large to view themselves not as self-sufficient individuals but rather as wards of the state, dependent upon government largesse for

Conflict is an endemic to all organizations. If the multi-judicial roles ambiguity occurred when there was not a specific city that was in charge of the function of the organizations (Kalinich, Klofas, & Stojkovic, 2016). If the goals of the multi-judicial organization were specifically defined, then it would have functioned properly. There are many techniques they could have used to make this organization work. Communication plays a major role in executing efficiently with other organizations. If they were aware early on that there was an issue, the organization could have accomplished their goal of raiding home laboratory, instead of raiding random homes. Since there was no well defined goal, were one had a say so on how to run the raid operations.