The nature of judicial review - Organization and relationship of state and federal courts in a federal system

Learning Outcomes

After reading this article, you will be able to explain the structure and relationship of state and federal courts in the U.S. system, describe the Supreme Court’s original and appellate jurisdiction, and identify the constitutional limits on federal judicial power, including the “case or controversy” requirement and the doctrine of adequate and independent state grounds. You will be able to apply these concepts to MBE-style questions.

MBE Syllabus

For the MBE, you are required to understand the organization and interaction of state and federal courts, and the role of judicial review. This includes:

• The structure and relationship of state and federal courts in the federal system.
• The Supreme Court’s original and appellate jurisdiction.
• Congressional power to define and limit federal court jurisdiction.
• The Eleventh Amendment and state sovereign immunity.
• The “case or controversy” requirement, including standing, ripeness, mootness, and the prohibition on advisory opinions.
• The doctrine of adequate and independent state grounds.
• The political question doctrine and justiciability.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Which of the following is NOT within the original jurisdiction of the U.S. Supreme Court?
   1. Disputes between two states
   2. Cases affecting ambassadors
   3. Appeals from state supreme courts
   4. Cases in which the United States is a party
2. Congress passes a law removing the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over a certain type of federal case. Is this constitutional?
   1. Yes, Congress may make exceptions to appellate jurisdiction
   2. No, Congress cannot limit Supreme Court jurisdiction
   3. Yes, but only if the President consents
   4. No, unless the case involves a state
3. A state supreme court decision rests on both a federal and a state constitutional ground. The state ground is sufficient to support the judgment. Can the U.S. Supreme Court review the case?
   1. Yes, always
   2. No, if the state ground is adequate and independent
   3. Yes, if the federal issue is important
   4. No, unless the state court requests review
4. Which of the following is required for a federal court to hear a case?
   1. The parties must be U.S. citizens
   2. The case must present a “case or controversy”
   3. The case must involve a state law issue
   4. The President must approve

Introduction

The U.S. legal system is built on a dual court structure, with both state and federal courts exercising judicial power. Understanding how these courts are organized, how they interact, and the limits on their authority is essential for the MBE. The Supreme Court stands at the top of the federal system, with specific original and appellate jurisdiction. The Constitution and Congress define the scope of federal judicial power, while doctrines such as “case or controversy” and adequate and independent state grounds limit when federal courts, including the Supreme Court, may decide cases.

Structure of State and Federal Courts

The federal court system consists of three main levels: U.S. District Courts (trial courts), U.S. Courts of Appeals (intermediate appellate courts), and the U.S. Supreme Court (the highest court). Each state has its own court system, typically with trial courts, intermediate appellate courts, and a state supreme court.

Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, hearing only cases authorized by the Constitution or federal statutes. State courts have general jurisdiction and can hear most types of cases, including those involving federal law unless Congress has made federal jurisdiction exclusive.

Key Term: Federal Question Jurisdiction The authority of federal courts to hear cases arising under the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, or treaties.

Key Term: Diversity Jurisdiction The authority of federal courts to hear cases between citizens of different states (or between a state and a foreign citizen), subject to statutory requirements.

The U.S. Supreme Court: Original and Appellate Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction is set by Article III of the Constitution and includes cases involving ambassadors, public ministers, consuls, and disputes between states. Congress cannot expand or reduce this original jurisdiction.

Most Supreme Court cases come by way of appellate jurisdiction, which is subject to congressional regulation. Congress may make exceptions to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction, but it cannot eliminate all avenues for federal judicial review of federal questions.

Key Term: Original Jurisdiction The authority of a court to hear a case first, rather than on appeal.

Key Term: Appellate Jurisdiction The authority of a court to review and revise the decision of a lower court.

Congressional Power Over Federal Court Jurisdiction

Congress has broad power to define and limit the jurisdiction of lower federal courts and to make exceptions to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction. However, Congress cannot expand the jurisdiction of federal courts beyond what Article III allows.

Key Term: Congressional Power to Limit Jurisdiction Congress may restrict the types of cases federal courts can hear, except for the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

The Eleventh Amendment and State Sovereign Immunity

The Eleventh Amendment bars most suits against states by private individuals in federal court. Exceptions include suits by the federal government, suits against state officials for prospective relief, and cases where Congress validly abrogates immunity under the Fourteenth Amendment.

Key Term: State Sovereign Immunity The principle that states cannot be sued in federal court by private individuals without their consent, subject to limited exceptions.

The “Case or Controversy” Requirement

Federal courts may only decide actual cases or controversies. This means no advisory opinions, and the parties must have standing—a concrete stake in the outcome. The case must be ripe (not premature) and not moot (still a live dispute).

Key Term: Case or Controversy The constitutional requirement that federal courts only decide actual, ongoing disputes between adverse parties.

Key Term: Standing The requirement that a party must have a personal, concrete injury traceable to the defendant and likely to be redressed by a favorable decision.

Key Term: Advisory Opinion A statement by a court on a legal issue not arising from an actual case; federal courts are constitutionally barred from issuing these.

Adequate and Independent State Grounds

The Supreme Court cannot review a state court judgment if the decision rests on an adequate and independent state law ground, even if a federal issue is involved. The state ground must be sufficient to support the judgment regardless of the federal issue.

Key Term: Adequate and Independent State Ground A state law basis for a judgment that is sufficient on its own and not dependent on federal law, preventing Supreme Court review.

The Political Question Doctrine

Federal courts will not decide issues that the Constitution commits to another branch of government or that lack judicially manageable standards. Examples include challenges to impeachment procedures and partisan gerrymandering.

Key Term: Political Question Doctrine The principle that certain constitutional questions are not suitable for judicial resolution and are left to the political branches.

Worked Example 1.1

A state supreme court upholds a state law on both state constitutional and federal constitutional grounds. The state ground is sufficient to support the judgment. The losing party petitions the U.S. Supreme Court for review. Can the Supreme Court hear the case?

Answer: No. If the state court’s judgment rests on an adequate and independent state ground, the Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to review the case, even if a federal issue is present.

Worked Example 1.2

Congress passes a law removing the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction over a specific type of federal case. Is this constitutional?

Answer: Yes. Congress has authority to make exceptions to the Supreme Court’s appellate jurisdiction, as long as some federal court remains available to hear federal questions.

Revision Tip

When analyzing Supreme Court review of state court decisions, always check if the judgment rests on an adequate and independent state ground. If so, Supreme Court review is barred.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The federal and state court systems operate in parallel, with federal courts of limited jurisdiction.
• The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over a narrow set of cases and appellate jurisdiction over others, subject to congressional exceptions.
• Congress may limit federal court jurisdiction but cannot expand it beyond constitutional limits.
• The Eleventh Amendment generally bars private suits against states in federal court.
• Federal courts may only decide actual cases or controversies—no advisory opinions, standing required, and the dispute must be ripe and not moot.
• The Supreme Court cannot review state court judgments resting on adequate and independent state grounds.
• The political question doctrine bars federal courts from deciding certain issues committed to other branches.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Federal Question Jurisdiction
• Diversity Jurisdiction
• Original Jurisdiction
• Appellate Jurisdiction
• Congressional Power to Limit Jurisdiction
• State Sovereign Immunity
• Case or Controversy
• Standing
• Advisory Opinion
• Adequate and Independent State Ground
• Political Question Doctrine