CCJ1020 Chapter 7 -Understanding America’s Courts and Judicial Power

Eric Marquette

Let's dive into what’s at the heart of our legal system: the dual court system. Now, this setup isn’t just a quirky feature of American law – it’s fundamental. It allows for both state and federal courts to coexist, each with distinct jurisdictions. The idea here was to preserve individual states’ legislative powers and judicial independence while ensuring federal oversight where it’s needed. It’s kinda like balancing local priorities with national interests.

Eric Marquette

Think about it for a second. If you're dealing with something like a federal income tax violation, that’s squarely in the hands of the federal courts. But if your neighbor builds a fence too far into your yard, well, that's probably gonna land in the state courts. It’s this division of power that makes the dual court system, like, so unique and, well, kinda complex.

Eric Marquette

What’s fascinating though, is how state courts have evolved. Back in the colonial period, every state had its own system. By 1776, they were fully functioning, but completely, you know, inconsistent across the board. Fast forward to 1848, and we see an attempt at streamlining. New York's Field Code laid out a model many states copied – at least for a while. Even so, there’s still no universal approach to how state courts are set up.

Eric Marquette

Take California, for instance; they run a three-tier court system, starting with trial courts at the bottom, intermediate appellate courts in the middle, and then their supreme court at the top. Pretty straightforward, right? Now compare that to Texas, which has two high courts – one for civil cases and one for criminal cases. That’s right, two supreme courts. And that difference is really, well, it’s indicative of how states prioritizing their own needs have shaped these systems over time.

Eric Marquette

So, why does this matter? It’s about adaptability, about creating legal systems that serve people where they are. No one-size-fits-all solution, just a tailored approach to justice. And that’s a glimpse at the dual court system we operate under today.

Eric Marquette

Alright, here’s where the process really starts to churn—pre trial activities. Once someone is charged with a crime, one of their first steps is the initial appearance, sometimes called a magistrate’s review. And that’s when, you know, they’re formally told what they’re accused of, advised of their rights, and sometimes their bail gets set. It’s a critical first look, kind of like setting the stage with all the players.

Eric Marquette

Now, about bail. We all know the idea, right? Pay a bond and you’re free until trial. But this system has been criticized a lot for favoring those with, well, the funds. That’s where alternatives like release on recognizance—or ROR—come in. With ROR, a defendant just signs a promise to show up, no cash needed. There are other options too, like property bonds or even supervised release. It’s about balancing fairness and public safety.

Eric Marquette

But before a case even thinks about heading to trial, the system has a couple tools to filter out cases that, well, aren’t trial-ready. One of these tools is the grand jury. And grand juries, they’re, uh, kind of like gatekeepers. They look at the prosecutor’s evidence and decide if there’s enough to move forward. And get this—it’s all behind closed doors. The defense? They don’t even get to be there. No cross-examinations or anything. It’s strictly whether the prosecution has made, let’s say, a minimum case.

Eric Marquette

Now, if a state doesn’t use grand juries, they often rely on preliminary hearings instead. Similar idea, but way more upfront, you know? The defendant gets to be there, their lawyer can poke holes in the argument. And during this hearing, three big questions come up: Was a crime actually committed? Was it in this court’s jurisdiction? And is there enough reason to think the defendant did it? Answer ‘yes’ to all three, and you’re moving ahead.

Eric Marquette

It’s wild to think about how different this is from what we see in films. Like that courtroom scene in "A Few Good Men." Tom Cruise shouting “You can’t handle the truth!”? But here’s the thing—most cases don’t even make it to that dramatic trial moment. They’re filtered, bargained, or resolved way before. The media really, really amps things up, but real court processes? They’re, honestly, way more methodical, step-by-step.

Eric Marquette

Alright, folks, we’ve reached one of the most fascinating aspects of our judicial system—the appellate courts and, at the very top, the U.S. Supreme Court. Now, appellate courts don’t conduct new trials. Instead, they review the records and decisions of lower courts. Think of it like this—they aren’t rehashing the whole case; they’re deciding whether the law was correctly applied. It’s more about legal precision and less about, you know, witnesses or dramatic objections.

Eric Marquette

Now, when it comes to the Supreme Court, its power of judicial review is its big claim to fame. This means it gets to evaluate whether laws or lower court decisions align with the Constitution. But here’s the kicker—they’re incredibly selective. Out of the roughly 5,000 petitions they receive each year, they only hear about 200. That’s... what, like, 4%? And even then, the decisions aren’t always unanimous. It's a reminder that even the justices themselves wrestle with different interpretations of the law.

Eric Marquette

To really grasp how appellate authority works, let’s look at a landmark case: Roe v. Wade. Now, it started as a challenge to Texas laws that criminalized abortion. So, the case went through the district courts and the appeals process, ultimately landing in the Supreme Court in 1973. Their ruling? It essentially established that the right to privacy under the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion. Whether you agree with that decision or not, its impact reshaped legal and societal debates for decades. That’s the weight appellate courts carry—changing the fabric of society through their rulings.

Eric Marquette

And while the Supreme Court gets the spotlight, we can’t overlook the critical work of other appellate courts. Most appeals don’t, you know, make headlines, but they refine how laws are interpreted, setting precedents that guide courts across the country. It’s really a meticulous process that ensures fairness, even if the system feels a bit, well, distant at times.

Eric Marquette

So, here we are at the end of our journey into America’s courts. From the vast network of state and federal courts to the nuances of plea deals and the power of judicial review, our legal system is a finely tuned mechanism—complex, imperfect, yet vital. And that’s all for today, folks. Thanks for joining me. Until next time, stay curious and keep exploring the world with an open mind.