Courts in the United States.

Courts in the United States. I INTRODUCTION Courts in the United States, government institutions that resolve legal disputes by trial and that hear appeals from such cases. The United States has a federal system of government in which power is divided between a central (national) authority and smaller local units of government (see Federalism). Correspondingly, it has a dual system of federal and state courts that are independent of one another. Because each state has its own system, there are essentially 52 court systems in the United States (the federal system, 50 state systems, and the court system in the District of Columbia). The authority of a court to decide a case is called its jurisdiction. Courts have jurisdiction only within geographical boundaries. A city court cannot usually try cases that arise outside the city limits and courts in one state rarely have jurisdiction over events happening or people living in other states. Jurisdiction is also limited by types of cases. A court with general jurisdiction may hear many different sorts of cases. The jurisdiction of other courts is limited to particular types of cases--for example, minor crimes, claims against the government, or child custody. Trial courts conduct trials, at which the parties present evidence and ask a judge or jury for a decision or verdict. Appellate courts hear appeals from the trial courts--that is, they review the lower court's decision to see whether a legal error was made (see Appeal). II DEVELOPMENT OF COURTS IN THE UNITED STATES The settlers who came to England's colonies in North America brought their legal traditions with them. Like the English courts from which they descended, early American state courts had five principal functions: (1) they conducted criminal trials, (2) they heard cases falling under common law (judge-made law), (3) they heard cases involving statutes, which legislatures sometimes enacted to supplement the common law and even to change it, (4) certain state courts, often called chancery courts, heard special equity cases that did not fall under common law; the chancery courts provided relief based on equity (fairness) and were less restricted by technical legal rules, and (5) a few state courts heard appeals from the decisions of lower courts. Until the states adopted the Constitution of the United States in 1789, no national courts existed. Article III, Section 1, of the Constitution established the Supreme Court of the United States and gave Congress the power to create other federal courts. In the Judiciary Act of 1789 Congress created two sets of "inferior" (lower) federal courts--district courts and circuit courts--and gave each jurisdiction to hear certain types of cases. Paradoxically, until the late 19th century federal courts were not permitted to hear cases that involved most types of federal legal issues. Instead, to avoid state courts favoring their own citizens, federal courts were primarily used to settle ordinary common law disputes between citizens of different states. Unlike state courts, federal courts have no authority to create a general common law, either for a state or the country as a whole. The common law is a body of law developed by the courts in the absence of statutes enacted by the legislature. A federal court cannot pronounce new common law; it may only interpret the law contained in statutes or regulations. III FEDERAL COURTS Over the past 200 years the federal judiciary has evolved from a simple set of courts with limited caseloads into a complex arrangement of courts that interact with one another and the state courts. The modern system resembles a three-tier pyramid. At the base lie the U.S. district courts, which are trial courts for both criminal and civil matters. At the top sits the U.S. Supreme Court. In between are the U.S. courts of appeals, which hear appeals from district courts. All these courts operate under procedures established by the Supreme Court. Federal courts have jurisdiction to hear only those cases allowed under the Constitution and by federal law. These include cases interpreting the Constitution and federal laws and treaties, cases affecting ambassadors and similar foreign officials, disputes between states, admiralty and maritime cases (which concern commerce and navigation on the seas), controversies to which the United States is a party, and disputes between citizens of different states (called diversity jurisdiction cases). Under federal law, some cases may be heard only by federal courts--for example, patent and copyright disputes. But if jurisdiction is not exclusive, the parties may file cases involving federal claims in state courts instead of in federal court. In diversity jurisdiction cases in which the parties seek monetary damages, federal courts hear only cases that involve claims of $75,000 or more. Cases involving smaller amounts must be heard in state courts. Federal judges serve lifetime appointments, except for those on some specialized courts. All federal judges must be appointed by the president and confirmed by a majority vote of the Senate. A District Courts Congress has divided the United States into 94 federal districts and authorized about 650 judges to serve in the courts of those districts. Each district is contained within a state and no district overlaps state boundaries. Every state (and Puerto Rico, a U.S. commonwealth) has at least one federal district. Some states have more than one district--New York and California have four. District court trials are presided over by individual judges, who are responsible for controlling every aspect of the cases assigned to them. U.S. district judges are frequently involved in assessing the facts of the cases presented. The district court judge's findings of fact are ordinarily not appealable, but the appellate court may review the district court judge's rulings of law. A defendant facing federal criminal prosecution is entitled to a jury trial. The parties in most federal civil trials are entitled to juries if they wish. B Courts of Appeals The 13 U.S. courts of appeals hear appeals from judgments and orders of the U.S. district courts and from many federal administrative agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency. Of the 13 courts of appeals, 12 are located in federal geographic units known as circuits. The states are grouped into 11 circuits, with no state divided between circuits; the formal names for these courts are the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, and so on through the 11th circuit. The 12th and smallest circuit--the District of Columbia Circuit--is in Washington, D.C. The 13th circuit court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, is not defined geographically but is instead specialized by subject. It hears appeals in cases involving international trade, patents, trademarks, money claims against the United States, and veterans affairs. Congress has authorized approximately 150 federal appeals court judgeships. Their numbers range from 6 in the First Circuit (Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts) to 28 in the Ninth Circuit, the largest circuit (seven Western states, including California). The judges within a circuit are divided into rotating three-judge panels when deciding cases. Occasionally all the judges of the circuit may sit en banc (together) to decide a case. The term circuit derives from the original structure of these courts. Under the Judiciary Act of 1789, trials of certain cases were required to be held before three-judge circuit courts consisting of two Supreme Court justices and the federal trial judge in the district court. In addition to their regular duties, Supreme Court justices were required to ride circuit, traveling from district to district within their assigned circuit, often covering great distances. In 1891 Congress established the modern courts of appeals and abolished Supreme Court circuit riding. C The Supreme Court The Supreme Court, which consists of nine justices, is the highest court in the United States. It therefore has the final word on the most important constitutional and legal issues and establishes precedents that guide lower courts. It can hear appeals of cases from the U.S. courts of appeals and state supreme courts, so it has power to shape constitutional and federal law for the nation and to ensure that the states abide by constitutional and federal law. Although more than 5000 cases are appealed to the Supreme Court every year, in practice it can hear no more than 150. It has nearly complete discretion to decide which cases to review, which gives the court even greater power in establishing legal precedent. The Supreme Court typically decides to review cases that will allow it to resolve conflicts over legal interpretations that have developed within the federal circuits. See Supreme Court of the United States. D Courts of Special Jurisdiction In addition to the district and appeals courts, Congress has established several specialized courts to hear particular types of cases. These include the U.S. Tax Court and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, which hears claims against the United States (except personal injury and other tort cases, which can be filed in the district courts). The U.S. Court of Federal Claims also has jurisdiction to hear claims involving land and related disputes among Native American tribes. Other courts include the Court of International Trade; the U.S. Court of Veteran Appeals; and the U.S. Court of Military Appeals, which hears appeals from general courts-martial (see Military Court). Judges on many of these courts are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, but they serve for limited terms, not for a lifetime. E Territorial Courts Congress has established district courts in the various territories of the United States, including Guam and the Virgin Islands. These courts have the same federal jurisdiction as other U.S. district courts, but in addition hear cases involving local matters that in the United States are heard by state courts. IV STATE COURTS The vast majority of legal cases in the United States are decided in state courts. In every state the purpose of the courts is the same: to prosecute crimes and settle disputes. However, the states differ broadly in how their court systems are organized. Every state arranges its courts in a hierarchy similar to the federal system. Trial courts try cases, intermediate appellate courts consider appeals from trials, and supreme courts hear further appeals. But in many states the trial court system is not unified--that is, the common law and equity courts have not been merged and a single court cannot provide both common law and equitable remedies. An example of an equitable remedy is an injunction--a court order directing a defendant to act or refrain from acting in a certain way. Within a state's court system many different courts, with specialized jurisdiction, present a bewildering maze for lawyers and their clients. For example, New York City has 11 separate trial courts, each operating under different rules but often with overlapping jurisdiction. These include a general trial court to try felony criminal prosecutions and major civil cases, a Family Court, a Surrogate's Court to administer wills, a Civil Court for cases valued at less than $25,000, and a Housing Court to handle landlord-tenant disputes. Historically, judges on many state courts--including state supreme courts--have been elected and serve for various terms, some as long as 15 years. In an attempt to reduce the influence of politics on the courts, many states now require the governor to appoint judges. In many states, the initial appointment is for a period of years (ranging from 1 to 14), after which a retention election is held. Beginning in the 1980s, many governors asked panels of attorneys and others to provide lists of candidates from which to make their selections. By longstanding tradition all judges appointed to the federal courts are lawyers, but some judges on smaller, limitedjurisdiction state courts are not. In many states, for example, lay judges serve on rural traffic courts and as justices of the peace. A Trial Courts A1 Courts of Limited Jurisdiction In every state, most cases come to trial in courts of limited jurisdiction, such as small-claims, juvenile, and traffic courts. These are specialized courts that hear only one or a relatively few types of cases. They are the most numerous type of court in the United States and in some states these courts handle more than 80 percent of all trials. About 100 million cases come through these courts annually, but the overwhelming majority of these are simple traffic cases in which motorists plead guilty by mail. A2 Courts of General Jurisdiction Felony prosecutions and major civil trials take place in courts of general jurisdiction, which are empowered to hear many kinds of cases. These courts are often called superior courts, although the name varies by state. Every year more than 10 million cases or prosecutions are filed in these courts. Fewer than 2 percent of these ever come to trial. Most civil cases are settled by the parties and most criminal defendants enter plea bargains--that is, they plead guilty to the crime charged or to a lesser offense. B Intermediate Appellate Courts In 1948 only 11 states had an intermediate appellate court system. By the late 1990s nearly 40 states had established such courts to relieve the pressure on their supreme courts, which were being inundated by appeals. As in the federal system, state intermediate appellate courts hear appeals from both criminal and civil trial courts within their geographic regions. The larger states generally have more than one intermediate appellate court. C Supreme Appellate Courts Every state has a final appellate court. In most states these are called supreme courts, but in New York and Maryland they are known as the Court of Appeals. Oklahoma and Texas have two such courts, one for criminal and the other for civil appeals. The state supreme courts hear appeals mostly from intermediate appeals courts. Most supreme courts may choose which cases to review, and all have the final word on matters of state law--that is, common law, statutes, and the state constitution. Not even the U.S. Supreme Court may overturn their decisions about what the state constitution or state law means, although it may rule against the state if it concludes that a state law or constitutional provision conflicts with the U.S. Constitution. State supreme courts typically consist of between five and nine members who rule as a panel. V CHALLENGES FACING THE COURTS Most courts, both federal and state, are overwhelmed by a backlog of cases. In some urban courts, litigants may have to wait between three and four years before their cases are heard. Individual federal judges often have dockets (calendars) of several hundred cases that may take years to address. One reason for the backlog is the increase in lawsuits and appeals filed. Many suits will be dismissed by the court or settled by the parties, but every suit filed requires some judicial attention. Another reason for the backlog in the courts is understaffing and lack of modern equipment, such as computers to organize files. In most states and in the federal system, the courts do not have sufficient funds to increase staff or update equipment. The courts often compound these problems with inefficient administrative procedures that permit and sometimes even encourage delay. In recent years, many judgeships have been left vacant after the retirement of presiding judges. Presidents and governors have been slow to appoint new judges. For political reasons, Congress especially has been slow to confirm judges who are appointed. The appointment or election of unqualified judges is also a continuing problem. Although reformers who worked during the 1960s to change state laws to provide for the appointment (rather than election) of judges hoped this change would insulate the court from political influences, in many states officials continue to grant judgeships to reward their supporters. These individuals may be unqualified to serve on the bench. With the development of televised trials, the courts are facing more public scrutiny, and sometimes outright hostility, than ever before. Public criticism is not new, of course. Some criticism is political and stems from the very role that the courts play. Legislatures and executives often duck problems--either ignoring them or writing and attempting to enforce poorly written laws--leaving it to the courts to sort out ticklish legal and political problems. On occasion, to satisfy constituents, legislatures have even enacted laws they believe to be unconstitutional, waiting for the courts to overturn the laws and face the public's wrath. Public criticism of the courts is more intense when public opinion is divided because judicial decisions will inevitably conflict with one side or the other. Contributed By: Jethro K. Lieberman Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2009. © 1993-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.