Judicial System

As the ultimate authority on interpretation of the Constitution, the Supreme Court is a crucial power center in the American political system. At several points in U.S. history, the Court's decisions have helped to produce historic milestones in U.S. elections.

Using the power of judicial review, federal and state courts also have had a significant effect on the nation's electoral process. Acts of Congress, orders of the executive branch, or state laws cannot be put into effect if the courts declare them unconstitutional. But it is when the Supreme Court takes a case for review that the outcome can have the broadest and most lasting repercussions. Its decisions about the meaning of the Constitution can be changed only through its own later reinterpretation or through the difficult and time-consuming process of constitutional amendment.

The Constitution created a federal system of government in which both the national and state governments exercise significant legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Fifty state judicial systems, therefore, operate side by side with the federal court system. Each system has its own personnel and jurisdiction, and each interprets and enforces its own constitution and laws. Although the two court systems are separate and distinct, they do overlap: the constitutional principle of federal supremacy enables the federal courts to throw out state actions they deem to be in violation of the U.S. Constitution or acts of Congress.

Both the federal and state systems have trial courts and appellate courts. Trial courts are the tribunals in which a case is first heard—that is, they are courts of original jurisdiction. Cases in trial courts may be heard before a jury, or a judge may render the verdict. Appellate courts hear cases on appeal from lower courts. But appellate courts have no juries; all cases are decided by a panel of judges. These courts are concerned primarily with whether the lower courts correctly interpreted the applicable laws and followed the proper judicial procedures in deciding a case. Appellate courts normally do not consider new factual evidence because the record of the lower court constitutes the basis for judgment.

In contrast to the federal government's process, in which all judges are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the states use a variety of selection procedures, depending on their constitutions and statutes. Both appointment and election are used. Almost half the states follow a mixed appointment and election process, such as the Missouri plan, in which the governor appoints judges from a list of candidates approved by a judicial commission, and a referendum is held on each appointee's performance at the next general election.

Origins of Judicial Review