Then in 1875, apparently in response to the nationalizing influence of the Civil War, Congress first gave the lower federal courts general authority -- concurrently with state tribunals -- to decide cases involving federal-right questions.

On review the Supreme Court, via Mr. Justice Frankfurter, found southern racial problems `` a sensitive area of social policy on which the federal courts ought not to enter unless no alternative to adjudication is open ''.

But they objected vigorously to the proposition that federal courts may refuse to exercise jurisdiction conferred in a valid act of Congress:

By these measures, Congress, so the Court ( in effect ) now decides, gave not only needless but inadequate relief, since it now appears that the federal courts have inherent power to sterilize the Act of 1875 against all proceedings challenging local regulation ''.

The Taft-Hartley Act gave the federal courts jurisdiction over `` suits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization representing employees in an industry affecting commerce ''.

In short, congressional power to grant federal-question authority to federal courts is now apparently so broad that Congress need not create, or specify, the right to be enforced.

( 2 ) displacement of state law by federal law in state courts in all actions regarding collective bargaining agreements ; ;

( As we have seen, the Erie and York decisions require federal courts in diversity cases to follow state decisional rules.

Does Lincoln Mills suggest that if Congress granted jurisdiction over interstate divorce cases, the federal courts would be authorized to fashion a national law for the dissolution of marriages??

A careful student has suggested that `` In any new revision ( of the Judicial Code ) the legislators would do well to remember that the allocation of power to the federal courts should be limited to those matters in which their expertise in federal law might be used, leaving to the state judiciaries the primary obligation of pronouncing state law ''.

With few exceptions, Congress has not given federal courts exclusive authority to enforce rights arising under federal law.

To put it differently, state and federal courts have concurrent jurisdiction with respect to most claims of federal right.

That is, he did not claim in any of the four courts through which his case progressed that the jury charge had denied him any federal right.

In the federal courts, the parties ' names always stay in the same order as the lower court when an appeal is taken to the circuit courts of appeals, and are re-ordered only if the appeal reaches the Supreme Court.

The key distinguishing factor between direct and collateral appeals is that the former occurs in state courts, and the latter in federal courts.

For example, a criminal defendant may be convicted in state court, and lose on " direct appeal " to higher state appellate courts, and if unsuccessful, mount a " collateral " action such as filing for a writ of habeas corpus in the federal courts.

In the United States, both state and federal appellate courts are usually restricted to examining whether the lower court made the correct legal determinations, rather than hearing direct evidence and determining what the facts of the case were.

In most U. S. states, and in U. S. federal courts, parties before the court are allowed one appeal as of right.

In federal courts in the United States, arraignment takes place in two stages.

The doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata require any state or federal court deciding matters resolved on the merits by a court with jurisdiction between the parties or certain closely related parties differently than the way that they were previously adjudicated.

Baker v. Carr,, was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that retreated from the Court's political question doctrine, deciding that redistricting ( attempts to change the way voting districts are delineated ) issues present justiciable questions, thus enabling federal courts to intervene in and to decide reapportionment cases.

The Court cited its recent Wrightwood decision and decided that " hether the subject of the regulation in question was " production ," " consumption ," or " marketing " is, therefore, not material for purposes of deciding the question of federal power before us.

Originating in the New Deal, this procedure was a protocol for deciding where federal, state and city funds would go for financial services.

A Senior U. S. District Judge upheld earlier federal court decisions in the case, finding against Cox, and deciding that private entities have a right under the NVRA to engage in organized voter registration activity in Georgia at times and locations of their choosing, without the presence or permission of state or local election officials .< ref >

An additional difficulty in deciding whether a group meets the criteria to be adivasi or not are the aspirational movements created by the federal and state benefits, including job and educational reservations, enjoyed by groups listed as scheduled tribes ( STs ).

The U. S. Supreme Court is involved in deciding the federal government ’ s role in the U. S. governmental system based on determined constitutionality.

Whether the federal court decides a state law issue vis-a-vis diversity jurisdiction or bankruptcy jurisdiction, the federal court must honor state common law when deciding state law issues.

The Court's ruling meant that the federal courts, when deciding matters not specifically addressed by the state legislature, had the authority to develop a federal common law.

England v. Louisiana State Board of Medical Examiners, 375 U. S. 411 ( 1964 ), was a United States Supreme Court decision that refined the procedures for U. S. federal courts to abstain from deciding issues of state law, pursuant to the doctrine set forth in Railroad Commission v. Pullman Co., 312 U. S. 496 ( 1941 ).

Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U. S. 11 ( 1998 ), was a United States Supreme Court case deciding that an individual could sue for a violation of a federal law pursuant to a statute enacted by the U. S. Congress which created a general right to access certain information.

It was subsequently cited as precedent by a number of other federal courts deciding disputes between an eruv association and a local government.

Joanna Grossman, writing for FindLaw, emphasized " the need for the federal courts to weigh in ", rather than for states to continue making a public-policy exception when deciding the status of same-sex relationships independently of the decisions of other states, as states have been permitted to do in the case of incestuous marriages.

Discussion of the sources of Australian law is complicated by the federal structure, which creates two sources of written constitutional law: state and federal — and two sources of general statute law, with the federal Constitution usually deciding validity of State and federal statutes in cases where the two jurisdictions might conflict.

Among other claims made, Leonard claimed that a federal judge was incapable of deciding on the matter, and that instead the decision had to be made by a jury consisting of members of the " Pepsi Generation " to whom the advertisement would allegedly constitute an offer.

While minimal requirements for obtaining Swiss citizenship by naturalisation are set at the federal level, Swiss cantons and communities are free to introduce more stringent requirements, with some communities even deciding not to allow any naturalisation at all on their territory.

See Michigan v. Long, 463 U. S. 1032, 1038 ( 1983 ) (“ It is, of course, incumbent upon this Court to ascertain for itself whether the asserted non-federal ground independently and adequately supports the judgment .” ( internal quotation marks omitted )); Fox Film Corp. v. Muller, 296 U. S. 207, 210 ( 1935 ) (“ here the judgment of a state court rests upon two grounds, one of which is federal and the other non-federal in character, our jurisdiction fails if the non-federal ground is independent of the federal ground and adequate to support the judgment .”); Murdock v. City of Memphis, (" hether there exist other matters in the record actually decided by the State court which are sufficient to maintain the judgment of that court, notwithstanding the error in deciding the Federal question.

* Sept. 27, 1974-Once complicit with Chicago Outfit activity, area businessman and federal witness Daniel Siefert was gunned down at his Bensenville, IL, plastics factory, in front of his wife and youngest son for deciding to testify in a federal investigation as to his knowledge of an embezzled and " laundered " $ 1. 4 million from the Teamsters ' Central States Pension Fund.

In 1966, Nin had her marriage with Pole annulled, due to the legal issues arising from both Guiler and Pole having to claim her as a dependent on their federal tax returns.

According to Article 89 of the constitution, the Council of the Republic has authority to make declarations of federal intervention, a state of emergency, and a state of siege ( all security-related issues ).

The Bundestag members are the only federal officials directly elected by the public ; the Bundestag in turn elects the Chancellor and, in addition, exercises oversight of the executive branch on issues of both substantive policy and routine administration.

Before 1938, the federal courts, like almost all other common law courts, decided the law on any issue where the relevant legislature ( either the U. S. Congress or state legislature, depending on the issue ), had not acted, by looking to courts in the same system, that is, other federal courts, even on issues of state law, and even where there was no express grant of authority from Congress or the Constitution.

See, e. g., Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, ( giving federal courts the authority to fashion common law rules with respect to issues of federal power, in this case negotiable instruments backed by the federal government ); see also International News Service v. Associated Press, 248 U. S. 215 ( 1918 ) ( creating a cause of action for misappropriation of " hot news " that lacks any statutory grounding, but that is one of the handful of federal common law actions that survives today ); National Basketball Association v. Motorola, Inc., 105 F. 3d 841, 843-44, 853 ( 2d Cir.

Except on Constitutional issues, Congress is free to legislatively overrule federal courts ' common law.

Individual Sudeten German claims for restitution of property confiscated in connection with their expulsion after World War II ; agreement with Slovakia signed 24 November 1998 resolves issues of redistribution of former Czechoslovak federal land.

However, since the lawsuit was filed in a state California court, the lawsuit was tossed out because only federal courts have jurisdiction over intellectual property issues.

He also mastered a new set of issues regarding the commerce clause and, in a deliberately restrained manner, wrote constitutional decisions that expanded the regulatory powers of both the state and federal governments.

In the United States, variances in the insanity defense between states, and in the federal court system, are attributable to differences with respect to three key issues: ( 1 ) Whether to provide the insanity defense, ( 2 ) how to define " insanity ," and ( 3 ) the burden of proof.

President Bush avoided federal antipoverty issues, and instead used Kemp as a mouthpiece to speak on the administration's low priority conservative activist agenda.

The federal courts rejected their argument on grounds of procedural default, which provides that issues cannot be raised in federal court appeals unless they have first been raised in state courts.

This is because many of the issues and areas that in other countries are regulated through state or federal law, e. g. working hours, minimum wage and right to overtime compensation, in Sweden instead are regulated through collective agreements between trade union and employer organisation representatives.

With regard to Miranda issues, state courts have exhibited significant resistance to incorporating into their state jurisprudence some of the limitations on the Miranda rule that have been created by the federal courts.

They can help to explore broader issues regarding the evolution of a major federal agency.

While state courts must follow decisions of the United States Supreme Court on issues of federal law, federal courts must follow decisions of the courts of each state on issues of that state's law.