State Supreme Courts: Local Courts in a Global World

By Phillips, Thomas R. | Texas International Law Journal, January 1, 2003 | Go to article overview

State Supreme Courts: Local Courts in a Global World


Phillips, Thomas R., Texas International Law Journal


I. INTRODUCTION

The interrelationship between the federal and state courts is one of the most arcane and yet most fascinating aspects of the American experiment. After more than twenty years as a state judge, I remain amazed by how hard both Congress and the federal courts work to discern and preserve the appropriate sphere for state judiciaries. While the broad sweep of American history has seen increasing concentrations of power in both the federal executive and legislative branches at the expense of their state counterparts, I would argue that no similar accretion of power has occurred in the courts. One need only read the jurisdictional statutes of Title 28 of the United States Code, or peruse the table of contents of a few volumes of the Wright and Miller treatise,1 to see the enormous energy that federal government actors have expended to maintain state court viability.

Why has the federal government not, in the course of two hundred years, arrogated to itself a greater share of the judicial power? Why is more than ninety-eight percent of the nation's judicial business still conducted in state courts, and only two percent in the federal courts? And why are many of the "biggest" cases, if bigness be measured in amounts of damages sought or size of judgments awarded, tried in state courts? The answer, T submit, is to be found not in the generous nature of federal authorities, past or present, but in the fact that state courts, unlike state governors or state legislatures, are actually part of the federal judicial system. As Alexander Hamilton observed in The Federalist No. 82:

[T]he national and State systems are to be regarded as ONE WHOLE. The courts of the latter will of course be natural auxiliaries to the execution of the laws of the Union, and an appeal from them will as naturally lie to that tribunal which is destined to unite and assimilate the principles of national justice and the rules of national decisions.2

And as one whole, both state courts and federal courts have, since the inception of the Republic, applied and developed international law. The constitutional framers could have structured the government so that most of this authority would lodge in the federal system, but they declined to do so. Congress could have used the jurisdictional grant in the Constitution to place most international questions in federal court, but it has likewise declined to do so. Thus the state courts remain vital partners in the interpretation and application of both formal and customary international law. Whether the state courts' role will increase or decrease in the future is a fascinating question, and one which may turn on the extent to which courts retain a primary role in developing and applying international law.

I will first examine the compromise that enabled state courts to make binding decisions based on federal and international law as well as the law of their own states. I will then discuss the application by state courts of customary international law and recount the judicial response to whether Erie has restricted the role of federal courts in this area. Next, I will discuss recent Texas cases dealing with treaties and international conventions. Finally, I will pose some questions about the future of international law in state courts.

II. THE CONSTITUTION'S ALLOCATION OF POWER BETWEEN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS IN INTERNATIONAL LAW CASES

After America won its independence, each state operated a separate court system, with nine of the thirteen having some kind of separate court of last resort rather than a legislative high court.3 These state courts were viewed by outsiders as parochial institutions, favoring their own residents against those of other states and, of greater significance to our discussion, those of other countries. The Continental Congress could pass resolutions protesting injustices, but little more,4 as the only jurisdiction given to the national courts was for "the trial of piracies and felonies committed on the high seas" and "appeals in all cases of captures. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

State Supreme Courts: Local Courts in a Global World
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.