Can States Challenge Federal Laws In The Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States, and its decisions have a profound impact on society and the constitutional system of government. The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over certain cases, such as suits between states, and appellate jurisdiction over almost any other case involving constitutional or federal law. The Court's rulings can shape state constitutional law and have the power to override state laws if they are found to be in violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes its limits and protects civil rights and liberties. While the Supreme Court usually hears cases that have been decided in a U.S. Court of Appeals or the highest court in a state, it is not obligated to hear every case and selects cases based on their national significance and potential precedential value.

The Supreme Court's role in state law

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in interpreting and enforcing state law within the framework of the US Constitution. As established by Article III, Section II of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over cases between two or more states and those involving public ministers. It also has appellate jurisdiction on almost any case involving constitutional or federal law. This means the Supreme Court can hear appeals on a wide range of issues, including those related to state laws.

One of the most important roles of the Supreme Court regarding state law is determining the constitutionality of state laws. The Court has the authority to strike down state laws that violate the US Constitution, ensuring that state laws align with constitutional principles. This power of judicial review allows the Court to act as a check on state legislative power, safeguarding against potential overreach.

The Supreme Court's decisions have had a significant impact on state laws across various areas, including elections, education, and civil rights. For example, in Moore v. Harper, the Court rejected the "independent state legislature theory," which would have limited the ability of state courts to protect voters' rights and constrain legislative overreach. In another case, Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District, the Court affirmed the free speech rights of students in public schools, holding that they do not "shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate."

Additionally, the Supreme Court's rulings on federal laws and the US Constitution set precedents that state courts must follow. For instance, in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Court's decision on affirmative action programs effectively shut the door on such programs, even if authorized or required under state law. Similarly, in 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Court's interpretation of free speech rights in relation to a Colorado civil rights law will guide how state courts handle similar cases in the future.

Overall, the Supreme Court's role in state law is multifaceted and far-reaching. It serves as the ultimate arbiter of constitutional questions, shapes the legal landscape within which state courts operate, and ensures that state laws and actions comply with constitutional protections and principles.

State court systems

In the United States, state court systems exist alongside a federal system of government, with power shared between the federal government and state governments. Each state has its own court system, and no two states have identical court structures. State courts handle the majority of civil and criminal cases in the US, with federal courts handling different types of cases, such as those involving federal law or the US as a party.

State trial courts are usually located in a courthouse, often in the county seat. These courts may include more than one county in a judicial district, functioning as if they were county-based courts. If a litigant is unsatisfied with the decision of a lower court, the matter may be appealed, except in cases of acquittal in a criminal trial due to Fifth Amendment protections against double jeopardy.

State court judges are usually distinguished attorneys with some political involvement, pursuing a second career on the bench. A disproportionate number of state court judges have previously served as prosecutors, while others have backgrounds as criminal defence attorneys or trial lawyers. Unlike federal court judges, who are presidential appointees, the majority of states have some judges who are elected, while others are appointed. The methods of judicial appointment vary, and some states have adopted appointment systems to avoid issues with partisan judicial elections.

State courts operate within a landscape of federal laws that can constrain their powers, grant new responsibilities, override state laws, or create legal vacuums for state laws to fill. The US Supreme Court has the power to strike down state laws found to be in violation of the Constitution, and its decisions can have a significant impact on state court systems. For example, in Moore v. Harper, the Supreme Court rejected the "independent state legislature theory," affirming the traditional role of state courts in reviewing election laws under state constitutions.

Supreme Court procedures

The Supreme Court of the United States is the highest court in the federal judiciary of the country. The procedures of the Court are governed by the U.S. Constitution, various federal statutes, and its own internal rules. The Court has original jurisdiction (a case is tried before the Court) over certain cases, such as suits between two or more states, and those involving ambassadors and other public ministers. It also has ultimate appellate jurisdiction over all federal court and state court cases that involve a point of constitutional or statutory law. This authority permits the Court to affirm, amend or overturn decisions made by lower courts and tribunals.

Procedures for bringing cases before the Supreme Court have changed significantly over time. Today, cases are brought before the Supreme Court by one of several methods, the first two being the most common: By petition for a writ of certiorari, filed by a party to a case that has been decided by one of the United States courts of appeals or by the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces; or by petition for a writ of certiorari with respect to a decision of one of the territorial or state courts, after all state appeals have been exhausted, where an issue of federal constitutional or statutory law is in question.

Another method is by a certified question or proposition of law from one of the United States Courts of Appeals, meaning that the Court of Appeals requests the Supreme Court to instruct it on how to decide the case. This procedure is now rarely invoked. A further method is by petition for an "extraordinary writ" such as mandamus, prohibition, or habeas corpus. These writs are rarely granted by the Supreme Court, though they are more frequently granted by lower courts.

Certain cases that have not been considered by a lower court may be heard by the Supreme Court in the first instance under what is termed original jurisdiction. The Supreme Court's authority in this respect is also derived from Article III of the Constitution, which states that the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction "in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party." Although jury trials are in theory possible in the Court's original jurisdiction cases, there has not been one since Georgia v. Brailsford in 1794.

The Supreme Court plays a very important role in the constitutional system of government. As the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those looking for justice. Due to its power of judicial review, it plays a crucial role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power. It also protects civil rights and liberties by striking down laws that violate the Constitution. Finally, it sets appropriate limits on democratic government by ensuring that popular majorities cannot pass laws that harm and/or take undue advantage of unpopular minorities.

The Supreme Court's impact on society

The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States and its decisions have a profound impact on society. The Court's rulings shape the interpretation and application of the law, influencing the lives of citizens across the nation. As the final arbiter of Constitutional disputes, the Supreme Court plays a pivotal role in safeguarding civil rights and liberties. By striking down laws that contravene the Constitution, the Court ensures that the rights enshrined within it are protected. For instance, in Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969), the Court upheld the right of students to express their political views, ruling that they do not "shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate".

The Supreme Court also serves as a crucial check on the powers of the federal government and state governments. Through its power of judicial review, the Court ensures that each branch of government respects the limits of its authority. This was exemplified in a case where the Court asserted its authority to invalidate state laws that conflict with the Constitution. Moreover, the Court's rulings can shape public policy by determining the legality of laws enacted by legislative bodies. In Moore v. Harper, the Court rejected the "independent state legislature theory", preserving the role of state courts and constitutions in safeguarding voters' rights and curbing legislative overreach.

The Supreme Court's impact extends to safeguarding minority rights and preventing the tyranny of the majority. By setting limits on democratic governance, the Court ensures that popular majorities cannot enact laws that unfairly target or disadvantage minority groups. In doing so, the Court acts as a bulwark against majoritarianism, fostering a more inclusive and just society. The Court's rulings can also shape the legal landscape by clarifying the scope and application of laws. For instance, in 303 Creative v. Elenis, the Court's ruling on a free speech claim against a Colorado civil rights law will have implications for future cases involving similar issues.

Additionally, the Supreme Court's rulings can influence the development of the law by establishing precedents and interpreting the Constitution. The Court's interpretations of Constitutional provisions, such as the Equal Protection Clause and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, guide lower courts and shape future legal decisions. In Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Court's ruling on affirmative action programs set a precedent that supersedes state laws and constitutions, highlighting the Court's power to shape policy and legal doctrine.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court's impact on society is profound and far-reaching. Through its interpretations of the law, checks on governmental power, and protection of civil rights, the Court shapes the legal landscape and influences the lives of all Americans. The Court's decisions often address complex and contentious issues, making it a pivotal institution in the United States' constitutional democracy.

Federal review of state court decisions

The US Supreme Court has the final say on whether a right is protected by the Constitution or when a Constitutional right has been violated. It is the highest court in the land and the court of last resort for those seeking justice. The Supreme Court's power of judicial review means it plays a crucial role in ensuring that each branch of government recognises the limits of its power.

The Supreme Court's jurisdiction is established by Article III, Section II of the Constitution. It has original jurisdiction over certain cases, for example, suits between two or more states, and cases involving ambassadors and other public ministers. It has appellate jurisdiction over almost any other case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law. The Supreme Court has the discretion to decide whether or not to hear a case.

The Supreme Court has ruled on several landmark cases that have had a profound impact on society, such as Tinker v. Des Moines Independent School District (1969), which held that students could not be punished for wearing black armbands to school to protest the Vietnam War. In this case, the Court affirmed that "students do not shed their rights at the schoolhouse gate."

The Supreme Court also reviews state court decisions, although its power to supervise state courts has been limited since the Judiciary Act of 1789, which clarified that the Supreme Court cannot review state court judgments on questions of purely state law. The Supreme Court will accept jurisdiction to review a state court decision if it appears that the decision rests on federal law or is interwoven with federal law. In such cases, the state court must make clear that federal law did not compel the result and that state law was dispositive.

During the 2019-20 term, almost 73% of the Supreme Court's cases reviewing state court decisions were criminal rather than civil. The US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit had the most cases reviewed by the Supreme Court, with 10 cases, or 14% of the court's docket.

Frequently asked questions