The American Criminal Court System History and Purpose

Court History and Purpose

Tamieka Abrams

The American Criminal Court system functions as the interpreters and upholders of the United States Constitution. The courts through their rulings on the application of law essentially interprets the meaning behind the constitution and subsequent laws enacted by Congress. Through their decisions and interpretations, they uphold the values and standards set by the United States Constitution. A court typically consists of a judge, who applies the pertinent law to given situations and judges based on that; a Plaintiff which typically has an attorney and a defendant; who is typically presented by an attorney; a jury, who in a perfect democracy, helps ensures a defendant is given an unbiased day in court. The jury is ideally compiled of the ladies and gentlemen of the community, thus demographic, of the defendant. This compilation is supposed to help ensure a defendant, when tasked with defending against allegations of misconduct, is found culpable/liable by those who can better relate to them. The purpose of a dual court system is to prevent a centralized Government. A government that can have full control runs the risk of tyranny, the very thing the framers of the constitution sought to prevent. Local courts, specific to the state in which they govern, is more adept at handling certain affairs of its citizens. Also, each state is its own sovereign, with its own constitution, as such it can protect and uphold the rights of its citizens. The federal court, given its powers from the federal constitution, has been given the authority to prosecute crimes that affect interstate commerce, is treason, or committed on the high seas. Over the centuries, since the ratification of the United States Constitution the laws that Congress has been able to enact, has grown based on these interpretations of the powers given to Congress. The states were tasked with handling the cases which involved assault, murder, divorce, child custody etc. along with cases that dealt with intrastate commerce. Today, the Federal Government seems to have found its way into the affairs of the state by finding far-reaching, yet plausible ways that a given case can affect interstate commerce thus gaining jurisdiction. Things like "dueling" used to be legal. Dueling, the "wild wild western"-esque form of fighting in which two opponents would challenge each other in a battle to the death, in the form of a gun-fight. As society became civilized, things like this were deemed to be barbaric and phased out. The way the constitution initially seen African-Americans as property and not privy to the rights guaranteed by the law, has been changed with the passing of certain amendments. These Amendments to the constitution stemmed from a society whose views of slaves as property evolved in a way that made outright slavery illegal but, instead passed the 13th Amendment. The 13th Amendment made slavery legal as punishment for a crime. In a free market, a society built upon capitalism, where there must be someone who gains and someone who loses, free labor secures the bottom-line of companies. People of African descent and women were not allowed to vote (see the Black Codes of the infamous Dred Scott Case), which gave through to the civil rights movement and the passing of various equality Acts by Congress. When the views of society evolve, so does its laws. The judicial system in their role as interpreters of the law, are invariably influenced by the dominant view of the society in which it presides over. Society thinks that something is illegal, for example inter-racial marriages in the 1940's, 50's and 60's were outlawed in many states based not the views of society at that time, i.e., Segregation and the Jim Crow Laws, then the judges will continue to rule as such until the time comes when the view is changed. It's my opinion that with the laws of today, the federal government has moved into the territory of the local court. They have assumed jurisdiction, and it seems inevitable that a central government will come about. There are no checks to the laws enacted, where everything seems to be a federal offense. Our nation, through the enactment of these various laws, has penalized almost everything imaginable, thus becoming a nation that has about 325 million people yet, incarcerates the most of its own citizens than the rest of the world combined.