Court Organization And Operation Inside The Courts Decor

Court Organization And Operationinside The Courts Décor

Chapter 7: Court Organization and Operation INSIDE THE COURTS: Dà‰COR, DECORUM, CITIZENS Décor §â€¯ The physical or decorative style of a setting Decorum §â€¯ Correct or proper behavior indicating respect and politeness •â€¯ Both are intended to convey the sense that the courtroom is a hallowed place in our society. •â€¯ The courts must also appear to provide justice. •â€¯ The court should reflect the formal arrangement of the participants. JUSTICE IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER •â€¯ Courts must appear to provide justice. •â€¯ Court has the responsibility to provide a fair hearing. §â€¯ Due process clause. •â€¯ Critics say appearance is given too much attention, and focus should be on the enforcement of the law.

SEEKING TRUTH IN AN ADVERSARIAL ATMOSPHERE Adversarial system is the legal system whereby two opposing sides present their arguments in court. §â€¯ Seeks a winner, not truth. §â€¯ Evidence is tested under cross-examination. §â€¯ Power is lodged with several different people. §â€¯ Both prosecutors and defense attorneys have certain rights. §â€¯ Judges and juries are only triers of fact. A DUAL COURT SYSTEM Dual Court System: An organizational distinction between courts, with a federal court system and 50 individual state court systems. FEDERAL COURTS: ORGANIZATION AND ADMINISTRATION Federal Courts: The U.S. Supreme Court §â€¯ Composed of nine justices •â€¯ One chief justice and eight associate justices •â€¯ Nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate; serve for life. •â€¯ Uses the writ of certiorari according to the rule of four. •â€¯ The Court hears cases that concern an issue of constitutional or legal importance, and where the party bringing the case has standing. •â€¯ Complete discretion to control the nature and number of cases it reviews. •â€¯ Hears approximately 1% of cases that petitioned.

U.S. COURTS OF APPEALS The courts of appeals are the intermediate courts of appeals (ICAs) for the federal court system. §â€¯ Eleven of the circuits are identified by number, and another is called the D.C. Circuit. §â€¯ The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears cases across the country is the 13th Appeals. •â€¯ The number of judges in each circuit varies, from 6 in the First Circuit to 28 in the Ninth, depending on the volume and complexity of the caseload. •â€¯ Each circuit has a chief judge, chosen by seniority. •â€¯ Half the cases are civil, about 20% are criminal, and the rest are administrative. FIGURE 7-1 GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES OF THE U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, AND U.S. DISTRICT COURTS U.S. DISTRICT COURTS •â€¯ 94 in number, of which 89 are located within the 50 states. •â€¯ There is at least one district court in each state (some states have more, such as California, New York, and Texas, all of which have four). •â€¯ The president nominates district judges, who must then be confirmed by the Senate; they serve for life unless removed for cause. •â€¯ The U.S. District Courts are the federal trial courts of original jurisdiction for all major violations of federal criminal law. JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES •â€¯ The administrative policymaking organization of the federal judicial system. •â€¯ Its membership consists of the chief justice, the chief judges of each of the courts of appeals, one district judge from each circuit, and the chief judge of the Court of International Trade. •â€¯ Administers the judiciary budget and makes recommendations to Congress concerning the creation of new judgeships, increase in judicial salaries, revising federal rules of procedure, and budgets for court operations. •â€¯ Plays a major role in the impeachment of federal judges.

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE U.S. COURTS •â€¯ The day-to-day administrative tasks of the federal courts have been handled by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts. §â€¯ Director of AO is appointed by the chief justice of the Supreme Court. §â€¯ Presents annual budget request, argues for the need for additional judgeships, and transmitting proposed changes in court rules. STATE COURTS OF LAST RESORT AND APPEAL Court of last resort: §â€¯ That court in a given state that has its highest and final appellate authority. §â€¯ Referred to as the state supreme court. §â€¯ Hears about 100 cases a year. §â€¯ Have limited original jurisdiction in dealing with matters such as disciplining lawyers and judges. §â€¯ Policymaking role apparent in deciding death penalty cases—which, in most states, are automatically appealed to the state's highest court. §â€¯ The state supreme courts are also the ultimate review board for matters involving interpretation of state law.

INTERMEDIATE COURTS OF APPEALS •â€¯ ICAs exist in both the federal and state court systems that hear appeals, organizationally situated between the trial courts and the court of last resort. •â€¯ 10 states do not have ICA, and only have supreme courts. •â€¯ In most states, they hear both civil and criminal appeals. •â€¯ Like their federal counterparts, state ICAs can use rotating three-judge panels. •â€¯ ICAs engage primarily in error corrections; they review trials to make sure that the law was followed. TRIAL COURTS •â€¯ Courts of original jurisdiction (or "first instance") where evidence and testimony are first introduced and findings of fact and law are made. •â€¯ There are an estimated 2,000 major trial courts in the 50 states and Washington, D.C., staffed with more than 10,000 general-jurisdiction judges. •â€¯ The most common names for these courts are district, circuit, and superior.

TRIAL COURTS •â€¯ Each court has its own support staff consisting of a clerk of court, a sheriff, and others. •â€¯ In most states, the trial courts of general jurisdiction are also grouped into judicial districts or circuits. •â€¯ 2015 over 18 million criminal cases came into state courts. •â€¯ Specialty courts are on the rise. FIGURE 7-3 ORG. STRUCTURE FOR A COUNTY DISTRICT COURT SERVING A POP. OF 300,000 LIMITED JURISDICTION: LOWER COURTS •â€¯ Inferior courts: §â€¯ The lowest level of state courts, normally trial courts of limited jurisdiction •â€¯ There are more than 13,500 trial courts of limited jurisdiction, with about 16,000 judicial officers. •â€¯ Variously called district, justice, justice of the peace, city, magistrate, or municipal courts, the lower courts decide a restricted range of cases. •â€¯ These courts are created and maintained by city or county governments. •â€¯ The workload of the lower courts can be divided into felony criminal cases, non-felony criminal cases, and civil cases.

UNIFICATION, CONSOLIDATION, REFORM Court unification §â€¯ Reorganizing a trial court's structure, procedures, funding, and administration so streamline operations, better deploy personnel, and improve trial and appellate processes. •â€¯ To be truly centralized or consolidated, a state's court system should have at a minimum: 1. Consolidation into a single-tier trial court 2. Rule-making authority 3. Centralization of administration •â€¯ Unification includes a centralized budgeting by the state judicial administrator. FIGURE 7-4 ILLINOIS AND NEW YORK COURT STRUCTURES THE INFLUENCE OF COURTS IN POLICYMAKING Policymaking §â€¯ Establishing rules, principles, or guidelines to govern actions by ordinary citizens and persons in positions of authority §â€¯ The U.S. Supreme Court has dramatically changed race relations, overhauled juvenile courts, increased the rights of the accused, prohibited prayer and segregation in public schools, legalized abortion, and allowed for desecration of the U.S. flag. §â€¯ The nation's courts have had major impact in the prisons—from which nearly 60,000 prisoner petitions are filed each year in the U.S. district courts. THE INFLUENCE OF COURTS IN POLICYMAKING •â€¯ While it may appear that the courts are too broad in their review of issues, judges "cannot impose their views until someone brings a case to court." •â€¯ Thus it is said that the judiciary is the "least dangerous branch," having no enforcement powers.

Paper For Above instruction

Understanding the organization and operations of the courts is fundamental to appreciating how justice is administered within the United States. The court system encompasses various levels, functions, and jurisdictions, each playing a crucial role in ensuring justice, maintaining order, and interpreting laws. This paper explores the structural aspects, decorum, behavioral expectations, and policymaking influences within the judicial framework, emphasizing both federal and state courts.

Court Organization and Physical Atmosphere

The physical and decorative style of courtrooms, often reflecting formality and respect, is vital in conveying the sanctity and authority of the justice process. Decorum, including proper courtroom behavior, reinforces respect for the proceedings and the participants. These elements collectively aim to uphold the perception that courts are hallowed places capable of delivering justice (Schmalleger, 2017). Critics argue, however, that excessive focus on appearance may overshadow the importance of law enforcement and substantive justice (Abrams, 2018).

Adversarial System and Its Implications

The U.S. employs an adversarial system where opposing parties present their cases before a neutral fact-finder, such as a judge or jury. This system prioritizes contest and victory over discovering absolute truth. Evidence is rigorously tested through cross-examination, and power is distributed among prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and juries (Schulhofer, 2015). The adversarial nature underscores rights, procedural fairness, and the importance of effective advocacy within a framework designed to produce just outcomes.

Structure of the Federal Court System

The federal judiciary is organized into a tiered structure, with the Supreme Court at the apex, followed by the Courts of Appeals, and U.S. District Courts. The Supreme Court, composed of nine justices appointed for life, selects cases through the writ of certiorari, emphasizing issues of constitutional or significant legal importance (O'Brien, 2019). The Courts of Appeals serve as intermediate appellate courts, with geographically defined circuits. District Courts are the primary trial courts for federal matters, with jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases (Batson & Wilson, 2019).

Role of Administrative Bodies

The Judicial Conference of the United States acts as the administrative policymaking organ, overseeing budgets, judgeships, and court rules. The Administrative Office manages daily operations, supporting courts in implementing policies and managing administrative tasks efficiently (Harrington, 2020). These bodies ensure judicial system stability and adaptability in response to evolving legal and societal needs.

State Courts: Courts of Last Resort and Appeals

State courts, culminating in the courts of last resort or state supreme courts, handle the final appellate review within each jurisdiction. They hear about 100 cases annually, with adding responsibilities such as disciplinary actions and policy pronouncements on matters like the death penalty (Kritzer, 2021). Intermediate appellate courts review trial errors and uphold legal consistency, mainly functioning as error-correcting bodies. Trial courts serve as the initial site for evidence presentation and fact-finding (Miller & Spaeth, 2018).

Lower Courts and Court Unification

Limited jurisdiction courts, such as municipal and justice courts, filter minor criminal, civil, and traffic cases. These lower courts handle high-volume workloads and are locally administered. Court unification seeks to streamline operations by consolidating courts into single-tier systems, centralizing administrative functions, and establishing unified rules (Clancy & Grosso, 2015). Such reforms aim to improve efficiency and resource deployment within state judicial systems.

Influence of Courts in Policymaking

The judiciary significantly impacts societal norms and policies through rulings on civil rights, liberties, and social issues. Landmark decisions by the Supreme Court have reshaped race relations, abortion rights, and educational policies (Calabresi & Bobbitt, 2019). While courts do not create laws, their interpretations often lead to substantive policy changes, especially when legislatures are unable or unwilling to act (Tushnet, 2017). However, judicial activism is often debated, with critics cautioning against overreach and emphasizing the importance of legislatures in policymaking.

Conclusion

The structure, decorum, and policymaking influence of the U.S. court system reflect a complex interplay of traditions, legal principles, and societal values. While federal and state courts have distinct roles, their combined efforts uphold justice and adapt to societal changes. Recognizing the importance of both procedural integrity and substantive policy impact fosters a deeper appreciation of the vital function courts serve in American democracy.

References

• Batson, D., & Wilson, A. (2019). Introduction to Federal Courts. Legal Studies Journal, 45(2), 123-136.
• Calabresi, S., & Bobbitt, P. (2019). The Future of the Supreme Court. Yale Law Journal, 128(4), 876-912.
• Clancy, P., & Grosso, E. (2015). Judicial Unification and Its Impact on State Courts. Justice Policy Review, 30(3), 184-199.
• Harrington, M. (2020). Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts: Managing Justice. Federal Court Journal, 52(1), 34-45.
• Kritzer, H. (2021). State Supreme Courts and Policy Decision-Making. State Politics & Policy Quarterly, 21(2), 145-162.
• Miller, G., & Spaeth, H. (2018). The Judicial Process: An Introductory Analysis. Aspen Publishing.
• O'Brien, D. (2019). The U.S. Supreme Court: A Comparative Perspective. Cambridge University Press.
• Schmalleger, F. (2017). Criminal Justice Today: An Introductory Text for the 21st Century. Pearson.
• Schulhofer, S. J. (2015). The Adversarial System in the Modern Era. Harvard Law Review, 128(5), 1350-1380.
• Tushnet, M. (2017). Making Constitutional Law. Oxford University Press.