Reforming The Judicial System Of The United States

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.

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 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..

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

In 4 Ways to Fix a Broken Legal System Phillip K. Howard describes America as a land of once being free, now becoming a “legal minefield”. He focuses primarily on teachers and doctors, explaining ways in which their work is increasingly hindered due to fear of legal repercussions. While, Howard’s approach to fix these dilemma is simple and makes complete sense, it is nearly impossible to achieve in today’s America.

In Judicial Tyranny the New Kings of America, Mark Sutherland proposes his ideas on how America is now being heavily influenced by tyrannical judges who pervert the constitution, to support their individual positions. According to Cambridge Dictionary, tyranny is defined as, “unlimited authority or use of power, or a government which exercises such power without any control or limits” (Cambridge 2015). There is, in our society, an over-reaching judicial branch ran by judges who are consumed by the idea that they are the resource which can establish or re-define the law. The three fallacies with our society is tyrannical judges who impose man’s law above sovereign law , citizens who don’t know about the un-constitutional rule that judges are imposing over the courts, and those who know about it but don’t know how to react when facing a tyrannical judge.

The book “Judicial Tyranny The New Kings of America?” is a compilation of articles and speeches. It is compiled by Mark Sutherland and includes writings from famed Christian personality James C. Dobson Chief Justice Roy Moore, Ambassador Alan Keyes, U.s Attorney General Ed Meese, among others. The book is a call to political action. It is aimed at Christian readers and the writers all argue that Christian politics equals constitutional purism. It is specifically meant to invoke constitutional responses and activism. Each chapter, twenty in all, are a few pages long and systematically decry the current judicial system and explain the lack of constitutional basis for their current level of power.

The three tiers of the American federal court system consists of the Supreme Court, District courts which are also referred to trial courts, Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court.

The first form of Government in America was the Articles of Confederation, the Articles of Confederation worked but had a few flaws which included no system of national courts and also Congress lacked strong and steady leadership. The weakness’ were quite significant so the Constitutional Convention was held to revise the Articles of Confederation but instead led to the creation of the United States Constitution. The Federalist wanted a strong central government but the Anti-Federalists were scared that would be like Britain again so they opted for a small weak central government; their roles in the Convention were to make The Articles of Confederation please both parties and make compromises. The Constitutional Convention kept the Government from being overpowered by creating Checks and Balances, The Executive branch was responsible for enforcing the laws, Legislative creates the laws, and the Judicial Branch interprets the law. The Checks were intended to keep one Branch of Government from being more powerful then another Branch. The smaller and larger states compromised when creating laws by having the Senate and also the House of Representatives, smaller states like the Senate because this means all states would have an equal amount of reps but larger states preferred the House of Reps because the amount of reps was based on population.

When determining where a case can be brought there is a process it must go through. The court system has the power in deciding what case can be heard this is known as subject-matter jurisdiction. Cases may fall under state jurisdiction, exclusive federal jurisdiction, or concurrent jurisdiction (Kubasek 44). Exclusive federal jurisdiction applies to federal courts dealing with a small amount of federal claims such as bankruptcy and federal criminal prosecutions. The state court system has a broad range of jurisdiction; state courts have the power to hear all cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal court system. Concurrent jurisdiction on the other hand exists whenever there is a federal question or diversity of citizenship.

I believe that one of the best reforms to our justice system is the growing number of Problem-Solving Courts. Problem-Solving Courts are specialized courts that focus on specific problems in society, such as drug abuse, prostitution, mental-health, domestic violence, etc (Courts). I have chosen drug courts more specifically to research. According to drugpolicy.org, in 2012 1.55 million people were arrested for non-violent drug charges (Drug Policy Alliance). This is an astounding amount of people being arrested, which is why I believe it is important to have problem-solving courts. Unlike traditional courts, these specialized courts address the issues that individuals have that cause them to commit crimes in order to reduce the chances of

Before 1973 Alabama’s judicial system had one of the worst reputations in the United States and a disregard for the law. Courts would have backed up dockets, and cases that would take years to be heard. Lawyers complained about having difficulty trying cases outside their county due to the lack of a judicial code. Alabama is known for non-Alabamians coming to Alabama for a “quickie divorce”. Even though Governor O’Neal sought reformation, Howell Heflin was the one that made this possible. He organized the Citizens’ Conference on Alabama Courts in 1966 that consists of coalition of businessmen, lawyers, minorities, and many others. Conservative planters and industrialist that ruled the legislature and controlled the judicial rules controlled the judicial branch. The Citizens Conference made judiciary reformation possible by forming a judicial code, changing the way of selecting judges, and influencing leaders and citizens

Good in bad people is shown through Pip, Estella, and Magwitch in Great Expectations. Even some fugitives have good in them. When criminals get arrested they hire a lawyer to exhort them in making the right decisions in court. The Judicial System takes care of the court sentences of criminals. The United States’ Judicial System is very good.

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.

There are three women on the Supreme Court, one of whom is Latina, and there is one black justice serving on the Supreme Court (Brown, 2016). This is a major issue. The United States, the “melting pot”, has an extreme lack of diversity in their court system. This is an issue that affects several aspects of society. Decisions made by judges will affect the lives of men, women, and their families. The decisions made by judges can also create law. Unlike political officials, the people do not always have the power to vote judges into their positions. Instead, the people hope that their peers with the power to affect the system choose a candidate that will fight for them. Often times, this does not happen.