Judicial federalism in the United States: structure, jurisdiction and operation
| Autor | G. Alan Tarr |
| Cargo | Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University (Camden-NJ, United States of America). Doctor of Philosophy degree ? Ph.D. (University of Chicago) |
| Páginas | 7-34 |
Licenciado sob uma Licença Creative Commons
Licensed under Creative Commons
“To provide against Discord between national & State
Jurisdictions, to render them auxiliary instead of hostile to each
other; and so to connect both as to leave suciently independent,
and yet suciently combined, was and will be arduous.” 1
John Jay
First chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court
1 MARCUS, Maeva (Ed.). The Documentary History of the Supreme Court of the United States, 1790-1800.
vol. 2. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988. p. 27-28.
7
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 2, n. 3, p. 7-34, set./dez. 2015.
Como citar esse artigo/How to cite this article: TARR, G. Alan. Judicial federalism in the United States: structure, jurisdiction and
operation. Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 2, n. 3, p. 7-34, set./dez. 2015. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/
rinc.v2i3.44526
* Professor of Political Science at Rutgers University (Camden-NJ, United States of America). Doctor of Philosophy degree – Ph.D.
(University of Chicago). Master of Arts degree – M.A. (University of Chicago). Bachelor of Arts degree – B.A. cum laude (College
of the Holy Cross). Director of the Center for State Constitutional Studies and Board of Governors. Organizer of the International
Association of Subnational Constitutional Law.
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais
ISSN 2359-5639
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v2i3.44526
Judicial federalism in the United States:
structure, jurisdiction and operation
Federalismo judicial nos Estados Unidos:
estrutura, jurisdição e funcionamento
G. ALAN TARR*
Rutgers University (United States of America)
tarr@camden.rutgers.edu
Recebido/Received: 15.08.2015 / August 15th, 2015
Aprovado/Approved: 07.09.2015 / September 07th, 2015
Resumo
O presente artigo tem o objetivo de analisar o federalismo
no Poder Judiciário dos Estados Unidos. Para isso, realiza
uma comparação entre as competências e a autonomia das
cortes estaduais e federais, concluindo que o modelo ado-
tado no Judiciário é muito parecido com aquele seguido no
âmbito executivo e legislativo. Analisa, ainda, o fenômeno
da federalização no âmbito mais especíco do Direito Penal,
armando que, nessa seara, os réus têm direito a recorrer às
cortes federais sempre que algum dano que lhe for causado
com fundamento em norma estadual, violando uma norma
federal. Por m, conclui que, apesar de alguns problemas
Abstract
The present article aims to analyze the judicial federalism in
the United States. To do so, it compares the jurisdiction and the
autonomy of the federal and states courts, concluding that the
model adopted in the Judiciary is similar to that followed by the
Executive and Legislative branches. Furthermore, it analyzes
the federalization of Criminal Law, arming that, in this eld,
the defendants have the right to appeal to federal courts every
time that some damage has been caused to them based on a
state law, violating a federal law. By the end, it concludes that,
despite the existence of some endemic and periodical prob-
lems, the American system of judicial federalism has largely
7
Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, Curitiba, vol. 2, n. 3, p. 7-34, set./dez. 2015.
G. Alan Tarr
8
endêmicos e periódicos, o sistema americano de federalis-
mo judicial obteve considerável sucesso na promoção de
uniformidade nacional e diversidade subnacional na admi-
nistração da justiça.
Palavras-chave: federalismo judicial; Poder Judiciário; Cor-
tes estaduais e federais; Direito Penal; Estados Unidos.
succeeded in promoting national uniformity and subnational
diversity in the administration of justice.
Keywords: judicial federalism; Judicial branch; federal and
states courts; Criminal Law; United States.
CONTENTS
1. Constitutional Foundations of America’s Judicial Federalism; 2. The Federal Judicial Power and Fed-
eral Jurisdiction; 2.1. The Federal Judicial Power; 2.2. Federal Jurisdiction; 3. The State Judicial Power
and Judicial Federalism; 3.1. The Division of Authority; 3.2. State Judicial Power; 3.3. The New Judi-
cial Federalism; 4. The Federal Courts; 4.1. Development; 4.2. Current Structure; 5. State Courts; 5.1.
Structure; 5.2. Development and Reform; 6. Relationships between State and Federal Courts; 6.1. The
“Federalization” of Criminal Law; 6.2. Habeas Corpus; 6.3. Certication; 6.4. Cooperative Arrangements;
7. Emerging and Endemic Issues Aecting State and Federal Courts; 7.1. Judicial Independence and
Accountability; 7.2. Judicial Branch Autonomy; 8. Conclusion; 9. References.
1. CONSTITUTIONAL FOUNDATIONS OF AMERICA’S JUDICIAL FED
ERALISM
To choose federalism is to choose complexity in government. Having multiplied
the number of governments, a federal democracy must provide for the allocation of
power and responsibility among them, and it must devise mechanisms and procedures
for resolving disagreements and settling boundary conicts. Whereas the component
units of all federal systems exercise legislative and executive power, many federations
— for example, Austria, Canada, and India — have not instituted complete sets of
courts at both the federal and component-unit levels. The United States, in contrast,
has fty-one court systems, fty state and one federal, each with the full panoply of trial
and appellate courts. The federal government determines the structure and operation
of the federal courts, and each of the fty states determines the structure and operation
of its own courts. Federal law primarily determines the division of authority between
these court systems.
Under British rule, the thirteen American colonies operated their own systems of
courts, and the states continued to do so after independence. The federal Constitution
presupposes the continued existence and operation of state courts: Article IV requires
that “full faith and credit…be given in each State to the …judicial Proceedings of every
other State,” thus regulating horizontal judicial federalism, and Article VI mandates that
“the Judges in every State shall be bound” to recognize the supremacy of federal law,
thus regulating vertical judicial federalism.2
2 U.S. Constitution, Art. IV, sec. 1, and Art. VI, sec. 2.
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃO