Dual Court System

The federal courts interpret federal laws and state courts interpret state laws, which helps Nevada retain power and assists on making sure the national government does not become too strong. Close to ninety percent of cases heard in the American court system happen at the state level. Examples include: A crime that is a violation of state law such as murder, traffic violations, assault, robbery, family cases and most drug-related crimes. State courts are the final mediators of state laws and constitutions, but their interpretation of federal laws or the United States Constitution could be appealed to the United States Supreme Court. http://judiciallearningcenter.org/state-courts-vs-federal-courts/

In conclusion, state law and federal law are very similar as, they are each meant to dictate a measure of safety for the citizens of the United States of America. According to the United States Constitution federal law, which is dictated, allows the federal government the power to make laws for the people and for the country as a whole. State laws are meant to allow each state to be allowed to govern them and handle the issues within their states. This power was given to them from the Bill of Rights that was also outlined in the Constitution (FindLaw, 2012).

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.

The difference between federal courts and State courts is that State courts are usually established by a state themselves and Federal courts are established under the U.S. Constitution to decide disputes involving the Constitution and laws passed by Congress.

The dual court system differentiates between the state and federal court systems. The federal court system was established in accordance with constitutional law, which allows Congress to ordain federal courts that are separate from and external to the Supreme Court but which also deal with federal legal matters. These separate federal courts are referred to as "inferior courts," in relation to their position in the hierarchy with the Supreme Court at the summit. Each of the inferior courts established by Congress has a specific and unique jurisdiction.

The U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court are governed by Article III of the US Constitution. They also include two special courts: (a) the U.S. Court of Claims and (b) the U.S. Court of International Trade. Often times than not the two

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..

One example being that there are federal crimes such as counterfeiting, racketeering and tax crimes fall under jurisdiction of the federal courts, and state crimes such as homicide, aggravated assault and robbery which fall under the jurisdiction of state courts. The federal court does reign supreme over the state courts; they can review state convictions to determine whether or not the constitution was violated.

For the past 50 years, America’s criminal justice system has encountered several significant changes dealing with courts and policing. According to Marion and Oliver (2006), the historical Supreme Court rulings like Mapp v. Ohio and Miranda v. Arizona mold the way courts and law enforcement handle individuals charged with committing crimes. This paper will discuss the evolution of courts and law enforcement reflects the diverse and changing need for today’s population which is first importance, the urgency for cooperation and communication among criminal justice agencies and law enforcement within the country. Individuals must

There are two kinds of court in this country. The two courts are state and federal. In this essay I️ will be briefing you on the things that they have in common and the things they don’t have in common such as behavior in the court and the way they handle the state court room.

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 California and Federal judicial systems are very similar in how they are designed and how they function. California state courts are established and primarily obtain their power from the California State Constitution. This is similar to federal judicial system in that federal courts derive their power from the United States Constitution. The following paper will compare and contrast the extreme similarities between both judicial systems as well as some of the distinct differences.

The criminal justice system holds trials on cases. Most cases are dealt with outside of court. If a case is significant enough and is approved, then it goes to the state court. Most cases do not pass the state court, but if someone objects to the state court’s decision, then the case may go to the federal court. Another way a case is able to be held at the federal court is if the case involves two different states and involves over $70,000. According to crash course, there are four different scenarios in which the federal courts have original jurisdiction (case goes directly to federal court without the interaction of state or local courts). In all of these scenarios the cases must be brought in an original district court. The first scenario is in cases where the law at issue is a federal law. The

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.

When the United States Constitution was established, the founding fathers devised the core of the court system that is present in today’s society. The state and federal government each have a version of a Supreme Court which is typically led by a Chief Justice. The states level Supreme Court Justice governs the issues that pertains to the citizens within the respective state. These individuals will also take part in hearings or proceedings that impact of law of the state and hear constitutional cases with regards to the state. On the federal side, a Supreme Court Chief Justice will operates more on a national