Relationship To Federal Courts
The relationship between state courts and federal courts is quite complicated. Although the United States Constitution and federal laws override state laws where there is a conflict between federal and state law, state courts are not subordinate to federal courts. Rather, they are two parallel sets of courts with different often overlapping jurisdiction. While federal law is supreme relative to state law, federal courts are not always superior to state courts.
Under the 11th Amendment to the United States Constitution, federal courts are generally prohibited from exercising jurisdiction in civil lawsuits for money damages between a state government and a private party. This limitation does not generally, however, prohibit federal courts from considering suits by private parties against local governments, state and local officials, state sponsored entities that are not part of state government, or suits against states seeking injunctive relief but not money damages.
There are multiple areas such as tax collection and legislative action, where federal courts may not impose injunctions on states as a matter of federal statutory law.
Federal courts must defer to state courts in their the interpretation of state laws, and sometimes "certify" a question of state law in a case pending before it to the highest state court in the state, if state law is unsettled on the issue.
As a general rule, federal courts, other than the U.S. Supreme Court, do not resolve federal law issues pending in state courts. This is true even when, for example, two different state courts reach conflicting interpretations of a federal law in cases involving the same parties litigating the same issues in more than one forum, such as jurisdictional issues arising under the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act.
Some state courts may certify a question of federal law to a federal court, but this is less common and is generally not mandatory.
While there are multiple ways that federal courts can review state court decisions for violations of state law, in practice, there is virtually no federal court review of state courts in civil cases, and there is in practice, very little meaningful federal court review of state courts in criminal cases where the death penalty is not imposed. There is substantial review by the federal courts, in practice, of state court decisions to impose the death penalty, however.
Read more about this topic: State Court (United States)
Famous quotes containing the words relationship to, relationship, federal and/or courts:
“Sometimes in our relationship to another human being the proper balance of friendship is restored when we put a few grains of impropriety onto our own side of the scale.”
—Friedrich Nietzsche (18441900)
“It was a real treat when hed read me Daisy Miller out loud. But wed reached the point in our relationship when, in a straight choice between him and Henry James, Id have taken Henry James any day even if Henry James were dead and not much of a one for the girls when living, either.”
—Angela Carter (19401992)
“There are always those who are willing to surrender local self-government and turn over their affairs to some national authority in exchange for a payment of money out of the Federal Treasury. Whenever they find some abuse needs correction in their neighborhood, instead of applying the remedy themselves they seek to have a tribunal sent on from Washington to discharge their duties for them, regardless of the fact that in accepting such supervision they are bartering away their freedom.”
—Calvin Coolidge (18721933)
“The decisions of law courts should never be printed: in the long run, they form a counterauthority to the law.”
—Denis Diderot (17131784)