Court Systems in China and the United States

The United States district courts are the trial courts of the federal court system. The district courts have jurisdiction over every category of federal cases ranging from civil cases to criminal cases. There are 94 federal judicial districts, including at least one district in each state, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. The Virgin Islands; Guam, and the Northern Mariana Islands are three U.S. territories that have district courts that hear federal cases, including bankruptcy cases.

The dual court system permits the federal administration restricted access into each jurisdiction problems and state law is not allowed to be involved in the federal judicial system, without there being some type of encounter at the state or federal stages. Federal courts have the authority to resolve only the cases in which the Constitution allows them to have power over. These types of courts are to be found in the bigger only; specific cases are allowed to be received within the federal courts. For instances, the cases that are allowed to be viewed in the federal courts are cases that include the United States government and other officers that are being sued. The dual court system is not the only part of the story, each level there is a different court chain of command. States often have limited jurisdiction courts, such as traffic courts, trial courts and appellate courts, and supreme courts (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2011). Each trial court adjudicates different offenses. Appellate courts consider different matters depending on where they lie in the court hierarchy. Appeals from state courts can sometimes be heard in the federal courts. Higher-level courts can control the actions and decisions of lower courts, but not the other way around. Despite the apparent complexity, each court has its place. The main focus of the court system is to uphold the law, protect citizens and their rights and resolving

The California judicial system and the United States federal system are different but comparable. Consequently, both the California and the United States federal judicial system handle different types of cases. Essentially, California handles cases that deal with 1) state courts 2) civil cases and 3) criminal cases. On the other hand, the United States federal system handle cases that deal with 1) the Constitution, 2) laws that are passed through congress and 3) cases in which the United States is a party. In spite of the fact that the California system and the United States federal system are different yet comparable, this paper will address both court systems concluding with the United States federal system being superior to the California system.

The U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal, and the U.S. Supreme Court are governed by Article III of the US Constitution. They also include two special courts: (a) the U.S. Court of Claims and (b) the U.S. Court of International Trade. Often times than not the two

To begin with my state, the New York judicial system comprises of the Court of Appeal, the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, the Supreme Court, County Courts and Limited Jurisdiction Courts, Surrogate’s Court and Family Courts. These courts function throughout the state. The Criminal and Civil Courts operate only in the New York City. The County Courts, City courts and village Justice Courts are found outside the New York City.

The dual court system differentiates between the state and federal court systems. The federal court system was established in accordance with constitutional law, which allows Congress to ordain federal courts that are separate from and external to the Supreme Court but which also deal with federal legal matters. These separate federal courts are referred to as "inferior courts," in relation to their position in the hierarchy with the Supreme Court at the summit. Each of the inferior courts established by Congress has a specific and unique jurisdiction.

However in the United States we have what is referred to as a dual court system. A dual court system can be defined as a judicial system comprising federal- and state- level judicial systems. A dual court system separates federal and state courts. According to the book a dual court system is advantageous and desirable because it is parallel to federalism. Federalism is a system of government where power is constitutionally divided between central governing body and various constituent units. In the United States, the federal government makes laws, but federalism also gives the state’s power to make their own laws (Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worral, 2011). The Founding fathers saw it as a way to serve as check on an abusive or tyrannical government.

The justice system in the United States is one of the most unique in the world. It consists of two separate levels of courts, state and federal.. Most of the laws that govern our day-to-day living are state laws; violations of federal law include offenses involving federal government employees, kidnapping or evading arrest, and fraud such as income tax or postal fraud.

The three tiers of the American federal court system consists of the Supreme Court, District courts which are also referred to trial courts, Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court.

There are 94 different federal trial courts call District Courts. The role of these district courts are to hear civil and criminal cases. Those district courts are broken down into 12 different regional circuits, each of the 12 regional circuits have their own court of appeals. These court of appeals deals with appeals within their circuit. Those appeals are then heard and their fate is then decided based on the record that was given before the District Court. All the cases that involve juvenile issues, child custody and Dupree cases, inheritance/probate cases, real estate, as well as most cases that involve criminal prosecution, personal injury cases, disputes and contracts, as well as public health cases. Each state handle local laws, has its own police, and court system. Each court system has its own Supreme Court which is known as the court of last resort. Local crimes in cases go before their local courts and from there it's it is decided whether or not the case goes before the state, supreme, or federal court.

When comparing the communist nation of China with the democratic nation of Australia many differences are apparent. The application of the legislative (law making and modifying function), executive (administrative function) and judiciary (law enforcing and dispute resolving function) is vastly different between the two nations as can see when we compare and contrast the underlying principles of each system of government. Firstly, both nations claim to uphold the concept of the rule of law, although due to corruptive forces surrounding the Chinese court system, this concept is often thwarted and equality before the law is not upheld. Within the constitutions of both nations the basic principles of separation of powers have been applied;

The American legal system consists of two separate levels of court, defined as federalism, which together administer and enforce the laws in the United States. Federalism distributes the government powers between both the federal governments and the state governments, which ensures that the power of the national government is decentralized.

In the U.S. judicial system, a defendant found guilty in a trial court can normally appeal to a higher federal court. These federal courts, or appellate courts, review decisions made by trial courts (Neubauer, 2010). Appellate courts can be on the federal and state level, but do not hold trials or hear new evidence. These courts consist of a judge, or a lawyer, or a group of either one, who read the transcript of the trial and whether the previous decision correctly or incorrectly followed the law (Neubauer, 2010). Similar to trial courts, the federal government and most states have made two different types of appellate courts: intermediate, which hear all cases, and supreme courts, which can pick and choose the cases heard (Neubauer, 2010). Even though there are many different types of courts within the judicial system of the United States, the role of the judge stays constant throughout the majority of branches.

The United States court system is the institution were all the legal disputes in the american society are carryed out and resolved. However, one single court is not enough to resolve every single dispute in society and that is why the court system is made up of two different courts, the federal courts and the state courts. Moreover, the federal and state courts are made up of several divisions made to handle legal disputes differently depending on its seriousness. For example, the state court is made up of trial courts of limited jurisdiction and probate courts were cases and disputes originate and then move up to trial courts of general jurisdiction, intermediate apellate courts, and courts of last resort respectively depending on the case.In contrast, the federal court consists of district courts, territorial coutrs, tax court, court of international trade, claims court, court of veterans appeals, an courts of military review which then move on to courts of appeals respectively and may ultimately end up in the United States supreme court. In addition, cases from state court may also appeal into the federal court system but not the other way around.

The US court system consists of a trial court, an appellate court, and a supreme or high court. The trial court is the first to hear the facts of a case and has original jurisdiction. The appellate court hears cases whose resolution is disputed by the losing party in the trial court. The supreme or high court hears cases whose outcome is disputed by the losing party in the appellate court. The supreme or high court chooses which cases warrant