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:
“Whatever may be our just grievances in the southern states, it is fitting that we acknowledge that, considering their poverty and past relationship to the Negro race, they have done remarkably well for the cause of education among us. That the whole South should commit itself to the principle that the colored people have a right to be educated is an immense acquisition to the cause of popular education.”
—Fannie Barrier Williams (1855–1944)
“If one could be friendly with women, what a pleasure—the relationship so secret and private compared with relations with men. Why not write about it truthfully?”
—Virginia Woolf (1882–1941)
“I am willing to pledge myself that if the time should ever come that the voluntary agencies of the country together with the local and state governments are unable to find resources with which to prevent hunger and suffering ... I will ask the aid of every resource of the Federal Government.... I have the faith in the American people that such a day will not come.”
—Herbert Hoover (1874–1964)
“In the U.S. for instance, the value of a homemaker’s productive work has been imputed mostly when she was maimed or killed and insurance companies and/or the courts had to calculate the amount to pay her family in damages. Even at that, the rates were mostly pink collar and the big number was attributed to the husband’s pain and suffering.”
—Gloria Steinem (20th century)