The Dual Court System

One point of view holds that the social responsibility perspective believes that individuals are fundamentally responsible for their own behavior and that they choose crime over other, more law-abiding courses of action (Schmalleger, F., 2015, p. 15). This perspective places the cause of crime directly on the individual and presumes that the individual is exercising their free will. The social responsibility perspective on crime also relies on theories about individual faults leading to criminal behavior, and that in terms of the criminal, victim, and justice system individuals play a role within the social aspect of crime. These theories suggest criminals are different from noncriminals for biological or psychological reasons, the difference between this perspective and the social

A court is a way for society to formally punish wrongdoers or criminals and make decisions. Courts determine behaviors based on society beliefs on what is acceptable behavior and which behavior is not and deserves punishment. Courts also decide on what is fair, just, punishment, how long to enforce a punishment, and innocents. Courts interrupt laws that can have impact on citizens, businesses, private parties, government officials, and many more. The purpose of the court is to upholding the law, protecting individuals, resolving disputes and reinforcing social norms. There are three elements to be considered a court in America. The first is the court must have the proper legal authority to be a court. This is given by constitutions or statues that have been created. The second is courts are found in the judicial branch. There are some exceptions to this but for the most part all courts will fall under the judicial branch. The third is when a court makes a

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.

Initially, the main belief was that criminal behavior was based on rational choice or thought, where criminals were believed to be intelligent beings and weighed the pros and cons before deciding to commit a crime; classicists Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham introduced this view. Essentially, these criminals would compare the risks of committing the crime, such as getting caught, jail or prison time, being disowned by family and friends, and so forth; and the rewards, such as money and new possessions. After making comparisons, the person would make a decision based on whether the risk was greater than the reward. This is like what is presented in an article on Regis University Criminology Program’s website, which states that a criminal “operates based on free will and rational thought when choosing what and what not to do. But that simplistic view has given way to far more complicated theories” (“Biological Theories Primer”). Nowadays, biological theories make attempts in explaining criminal behavior in terms of factors that are primarily outside of the control of the individual.

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.

Decisions play a big role when it comes to criminal behavior. Debra Niehoff, Ph.D in neurobiology, argues that despite genetic predisposition of “crime genes” the factor that has the most control of the outcome is the decision the individual makes. When an individual decides to drive while intoxicated, he/she sees the potential reward more obtainable over the punishment, and because of that decides to break the law. Philosopher, Aristotle, believed that a criminal was not a sick man but made voluntary choices which were caused by his personal appetite and desires. This relates to a lot of news stories in today’s society.

Theories of crime causation get to the fundamental characteristics of human nature. Theories of crime causation can be separated into trait theories and choice theories. Both types of theories make valid points about the causes of crime, yet they are have different implications for preventing the causes of crime. Thesis: Trait theories and choice theories both assume that humans are self-interested, but their conceptions of self-interest limit the applicability of each to certain types of crime. Trait theories appear more suited for explaining the causes of violent crime, whereas choice theories are more appropriate to property crimes or economic crimes.

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.

The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is approximately 3,515 square miles, with a population of approximately 3,578,056 (Rivera). The purpose of this court system is to ensure the protection of every citizen’s rights and freedoms guaranteed in the Constitution of the United States, enforce and interpret the law, and ensure the peaceful resolution of disputes. Additionally, this court system will be fair, firm, and impartial in its rulings and treatment of all citizens. The judicial system for this commonwealth, is a 4-tier court system, consisting of a Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, District Courts, and Municipal Courts.

The Judicial system in the United States is a system that provides Courts with the power and authority to administer justice, though that justice must be within the bounds of the law. As some laws in the U.S. tend to be ambiguous, or lacking in specific direction as applied to a particular case, the Court system is also responsible for interpreting the laws, and ensuring they are applied correctly on both the state and federal levels.

This theory concludes that a crime is not extraordinary or the result of a deranged mind. Each crime has its own set of choice structuring properties that determine an individual’s decision in relation to committing a crime. These structures can be highly based on a number of factors including: accessible targets, previous experience, time to commit the crime, what

The modern Canadian court system has taken many years to reach where it is today but with all that time to perfect the system there can still be problems that can bring about criticism. In Nil Christie’s “Conflicts as Property,” he talked about how the conflict was being stolen from the parties involved and criticised the Western world’s court systems well comparing them to a conflict resolution he saw in a Tanzanian village. Christie came up with 4 main criticisms in particular about modern justice systems and those criticisms seem to hold true when comparing them to the structure of Canadian Courts as well. The 4 main criticisms that Christie had about the court system are: that courts are located outside of the daily life of citizens and in the administrative centres of towns, the courthouses layouts are complex & difficult for citizens to navigate in, the involved parties are pushed to the side for much of the proceedings of the case, and legal proceedings transform conflicts

“…they are one people, and they have all one language…7Come, let us go down, and confuse their language there, so they will not understand one another’s speech.” Genesis: (Chapter 11, Verse 6-7). The trial of Orestes is used as the explanation for the formation for the court system. “I establish this tribunal. It shall be untouched by money making, grave but quick to wrath, watchful to protect those who sleep a sentry on the land.” Oresteia: (Eumenides, 704-706). Athena establishes the system of court trials after its success in resolving Orestes case.

There are two main views that explain who or what may be responsible for crime: The classical view, which views crime as a result of a person’s decision to commit a crime. This is due to the belief that every human has free will and are therefore responsible for their actions. The second view is the positivist view, this view believes that a person’s decisions are not made due to free will, but shaped by society and the environment that they live in. From these two main views branched many different views to explain who or what may be responsible for crime; known as criminal behavioral theories. Influenced by the classical theory is the rational choice theory, all the other theories; biosocial, psychological, social learning, and social structure is influenced by the positivist view.

Choice Theory and Social structure theory are both based on a common implication that criminal activities are not a determinant of psychological, natural or environmental aspects affecting an individual and persuading him to commit the crime but rather people commit the criminal acts willfully and voluntarily. They engage in crime such as assaults, car thefts and burglary as per their own will, just as anyone could open up a grocery store to earn income or go to university to acquire more skill and knowledge. People are in control over what step to take in their life since they act as representative of themselves. Additionally, people’s choice to commit crimes depend on the benefits they have foreseen against the costs of committing the crimes.