Relationship to federal courts

The relationship between state courts and federal courts is quite complicated. Although the United States Constitution and federal laws override state laws where there is a conflict between federal and state law, state courts are not subordinate to federal courts. Rather, they are two parallel sets of courts with different often overlapping jurisdiction. While federal law is supreme relative to state law, federal courts are not always superior to state courts.

Under the 11th Amendment to the United States Constitution, federal courts are generally prohibited from exercising jurisdiction in civil lawsuits for money damages between a state government and a private party. This limitation does not generally, however, prohibit federal courts from considering suits by private parties against local governments, state and local officials, state sponsored entities that are not part of state government, or suits against states seeking injunctive relief but not money damages.

There are multiple areas such as tax collection and legislative action, where federal courts may not impose injunctions on states as a matter of federal statutory law.

Federal courts must defer to state courts in their the interpretation of state laws, and sometimes "certify" a question of state law in a case pending before it to the highest state court in the state, if state law is unsettled on the issue.

As a general rule, federal courts, other than the U.S. Supreme Court, do not resolve federal law issues pending in state courts. This is true even when, for example, two different state courts reach conflicting interpretations of a federal law in cases involving the same parties litigating the same issues in more than one forum, such as jurisdictional issues arising under the federal Parental Kidnapping Prevention Act.

Some state courts may certify a question of federal law to a federal court, but this is less common and is generally not mandatory.

While there are multiple ways that federal courts can review state court decisions for violations of state law, in practice, there is virtually no federal court review of state courts in civil cases, and there is in practice, very little meaningful federal court review of state courts in criminal cases where the death penalty is not imposed. There is substantial review by the federal courts, in practice, of state court decisions to impose the death penalty, however.

Removal and remand

In cases where federal court and state court jurisdiction overlap, cases can usually be "removed" from state court to federal court by the defendant, but this right is often subject to strict procedural limitations. A failure to make a timely assertion of a right to a federal forum can cause a case within federal jurisdiction on its face, to be triable only in state court.

In a case with some issues that are within the jurisdiction of a federal court, and others that are within state court jurisdiction, a case can often still be "removed" to federal court. But, if the federal court then resolves the issues that give rise to its jurisdiction, the case may be "remanded" back to state court.

Removal and remand are primarily matters of federal statutory law.

Direct appellate review of state court decisions

The U.S. Supreme Court can (but are not required to) review final decision of state courts, after a party exhausts all remedies up to a request for relief from the state's highest appellate court, if the justices believe that the case involves an important question of constitutional law or federal law. Generally speaking the U.S. Supreme Court does not review decisions of state courts that depend entirely on the resolution of a state law issue.

For example, the U.S. Supreme Court will generally not consider an appeal of a state court determination that someone has both a state constitutional right and a federal constitutional right, if the result would be no different if that person had only a state constitutional right.

Normally in an average sized state, one or two decisions every year or two from a state's court system are reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court. Most U.S. Supreme Court reviews of state court decisions involve review of the constitutional rights of state court criminal defendants. A disproportionate share of the state court criminal cases reviewed on direct appeal by the U.S. Supreme Court involve death penalty cases.

In a typical state, multiple years will pass between U.S. Supreme Court reviews of a state court decision in a civil case, despite the fact that more than 97% of civil cases are brought in state courts rather than federal court.

Collateral attacks on state court decisions

Civil cases

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. The doctrine of collateral estoppel pertains to specific issues decided in prior cases. The doctrine of res judicata applies to an entire case.

Under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, federal trial courts are prohibited from considering matters already resolved in a state court civil action that is in the nature of an appeal, even on an issue of federal law. Federal courts are prohibited from issuing injunctions against certain kinds of activities of states, such as their tax collection activities, or directing state legislative bodies to take particular actions.

Government Departments

The most important political departments are called:

• The Treasury - In most countries, this would be called the Ministry of Finance. It is responsible for the raising of all taxes and the control of all government expenditure plus the general management of the economy. The head of the Treasury is called the Chancellor of the Exchequer and is currently George Osborne (who, on taking office, was the youngest Chancellor for more than 180 years).

Link: Treasury site click here

• The Home Office - In most countries, this would be called the Ministry of the Interior. It is responsible for criminal matters, policing, and immigration. The Head of the Home Office is called the Home Secretary and is currently Teresa May.

Link: Home Office site click here

• The Foreign and Commonwealth Office - In most countries, this would be called the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It is responsible for all international relationships, especially membership of the European Union. The head of the Foreign Office is called the Foreign Secretary and is currently Philip Hammond.

Link: Foreign Office site click here

Many other UK Government Departments are similar to those in other countries and cover subjects such as education, health, transport, industry, and justice. However, there are also small departments for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

When talking about the British Government, the media will often use the term Whitehall because a number of Government Departments are located along a central London street very close to Parliament called Whitehall.

Government Ministers

All Government Departments are run by Ministers who are either Members of the House of Commons or Members of the House of Lords. There are three classes of Minister:

• Secretary of State - This is usually the head of a Department.
• Minister of State - This is a middle-ranking minister.
• Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State - This is the most junior class of minister.

The Prime Minster and all the Secretaries of State together comprise an executive body of government called the Cabinet. The Cabinet meets usually once a week on Tuesday morning. Cabinet meetings are confidential and all members are bound by any decision that it takes in a practice called collective responsibility. An extensive system of Cabinet Committees considers matters either before they go to Cabinet or (more usually) instead of them going to Cabinet.

Although all Ministers are appointed by the Prime Minster and report to him, ultimately all Ministers are accountable to Parliament:

• About once a month, they have to face questions in the House of Commons about the work of the Department.
• Each government department has a special committee of the House of Commons which watches the work of that Department.
• Any government initiative or important statement concerning a Department must be the subject of an appearance in the House of Commons by a minister from that Department.

The civil service

Each Secretary of State is able to appoint a couple of political advisers – formally known as Special Advisers – to serve him or her. I was a Special Adviser to Merlyn Rees in the Northern Ireland Office from 1974-1976 and in the Home Office from 1976-1978, while my son Richard was a Special Adviser to Ruth Kelly in the Department for Education & Skills in 2005 and a Special Adviser to Douglas Alexander at the Department for International Development in 2009-2010.

But Special Advisers are simply advisers. They have no line management responsibilities in respect of the staff of the Department. Besides these tiny number of Special Advisers, Government Departments are run by civil servants who are recruited in a totally open manner and serve governments of any political parties. The independence and professionalism of the British civil service are fundamental features of the British political system. My son Richard once worked as a civil servant in what was then the Department of Trade & Industry and my half-brother Chris was an official in the Treasury for five years.

DEVOLVED GOVERNMENT

The UK has a devolved system of government, but this is categorically not a system of federal government such as in the United States [click here] or Australia [click here], partly because less than a fifth of the citizens of the UK are covered the three bodies in question and partly because the three bodies themselves have different powers from one another.

The three devolved administrations are:

The Scottish Parliament

This came into operation in May 1999 and covers the 5M citizens of Scotland. It has 129 members elected by a system of proportional representation known as the mixed member system. As a result, 73 members represent individual geographical constituencies elected by the 'first past the post' (FPTP) system, with a further 56 members returned from eight additional member regions, each electing seven members. All members are elected for four-year terms.

The Scottish Parliament meets in Holyrood, Edinburgh. It has legislative powers over those matters not reserved to the UK Parliament and it has limited tax-raising powers.

In the election of May 2011, for the first time a single political party gained an overall majority of the seats in the Scottish Parliament. That party was the Scottish National Party and its victory enabled it to require the UK Government to permit the holding of a referendum on Scottish independence.

The referendum was held on 18 September 2014 and, on an astonishing turnout of 85%, the 'no' vote won a decisive victory by 55% to 45%. However, in the final week of the two-year referendum campaign, the three major parties in the UK Parliament agreed that, if the Scots voted 'no', there would be an early transfer of substantial extra powers to the Scottish Parliament. This is now the subject of fierce political debate because of the implications for the other nations in the UK and for the UK Parliament itself.

The Welsh Assembly

This came into operation in May 1999 and covers the 3M citizens of Wales. It has 60 members elected by a system of proportional representation known as the mixed member system. As a result, 40 members represent individual geographical constituencies elected by the 'first past the post' (FPTP) system, with a further 20 members returned from five additional member regions, each electing four members. All members are elected for four-year terms.

It meets in the Senedd, Cardiff. When first created, the Assembly had no powers to initiate primary legislation. However, since 2006, the Assembly has powers to legislate in some areas, though still subject to the veto of the Westminster Parliament. The Assembly has no tax-varying powers. The Welsh Assembly, therefore, has less power than either the Scottish Parliament or the Northern Ireland Assembly because - unlike Scotland and Northern Ireland - Wales does not have a separate legal system from England.