Jurisdiction Between Federal and State Courts in the U.S.

The United States, with its unique federal structure, maintains two parallel judicial systems: federal courts and state courts. This duality stems from both the U.S. Constitution and the historical development of American governance. In this post, we’ll explore how these two systems divide jurisdiction, where conflicts may arise, and why this distinction matters in practice.

Constitutional Basis: Where Does Federal Jurisdiction Come From?

Article III of the U.S. Constitution defines the scope of federal judicial power. According to this provision, federal courts can only hear cases falling within specific subject areas. In addition, the Supremacy Clause establishes that federal law prevails in the event of a

conflict with state law. However, this does not mean that federal courts have automatic authority over all cases.

There are two main ways a case can go to federal court. The first is when the case involves a federal question — like a constitutional issue or a federal law. The second is when the case involves parties from different U.S. states or countries and the amount at stake is more than $75,000. This is called diversity jurisdiction.

Some matters can only be handled by federal courts. These include patent cases, federal criminal charges, or immigration appeals. Other types of cases — like civil rights violations or some contract disputes — can be heard in either federal or state court. This is known as concurrent jurisdiction.

Sometimes, a case that starts in state court can be moved to federal court. This is called removal. For example, imagine someone from California sues a company from New York for $100,000 in a California state court. The company can ask to move the case to federal court, because the parties are from different states and the claim meets the monetary threshold.

The appeal process also differs between the two systems. In state courts, a case usually goes from trial court to a state appellate court, and possibly to the state’s highest court. If the case involves a serious federal question, it may even reach the U.S. Supreme Court. In the federal system, appeals go from the trial-level District Court to the Court of Appeals, and finally to the Supreme Court.

Choosing between state and federal court can be a strategic decision. State courts are often more local and may feel more familiar to the parties. Federal courts tend to be more formal and efficient, with stricter rules and timelines. Lawyers often choose a forum based on what will benefit their client most.

One famous case that highlights the relationship between state and federal law is Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins (1938). The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that federal courts must apply state law in certain cases, even if the case is being heard in a federal court under diversity jurisdiction. This decision reinforced respect for state law and helped prevent “forum shopping,” where parties choose a court just to get a more favorable result.

In short, knowing whether a case belongs in state or federal court can shape its path, speed, and even outcome. For anyone involved in U.S.-based legal matters — including foreign companies, investors, or individuals — it’s crucial to understand how this division works. It’s also a helpful lens for comparing the U.S. legal system with other federal countries around the world.