1. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review1 Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee Title history of the Fairfax Estate (300,000 acres) commonly known as NORTHERN NECK (VIRGINIA)

2. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review2 S.Ct. review of State Courts Issue: Can the U.S. Supreme Court review (and potentially set aside) decisions of State high courts on questions of federal law? –Section 25 of the Judiciary Act gives the S.Ct. appellate jdx in such cases –Is Section 25 constitutional?

3. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review3 Text of Art. III Section 2, Par. 1: –The Judicial Power shall extend to all Cases in Law and Equity arising under this Constitution Section 2, Par. 2: –In all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jdx, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make

4. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review4 If Const’l text is unclear, does Const’l Structure or Theory supply an answer? Need for single authoritative answer on questions of federal law? –How destabilizing is lack of uniformity? Doesn’t original jurisdiction provide sufficient safeguard? Plaintiff has choice of forum; Def’t can remove Interposition –Isn’t divergence inherent in our federalistic structure? Isn’t it healthy?

5. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review5 Federalism Does S.Ct. review of state court decisions undermine state sovereignty? Is it necessary in order to insure federal supremacy? –If state court interpretation of federal law (within each state) was supreme, how effective a limit would the constitution be on state power?

6. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review6 Nullification –Should states be able to resist unconstitutional federal laws, especially where the unconstitu- tionality is caused by misinterpretation by S.Ct? Would such a practice have prevented secession? –On questions of federal power? If States are sovereign, and the federal gov’t enjoys only those limited powers delegated by the states, shouldn’t state courts have the final say as to the extent of that delegation?

7. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review7 Dual Courts - Dual Sovereignty Basic Premise: each sovereign within its sphere of authority –state courts supreme on issues of state law –federal courts supreme on federal law Creates need for clear jurisdictional rules –abstention doctrines –federal jdx over state law issues? Protective jurisdiction Judicial efficiency

8. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review8 Cohens v. Virginia Issue: Can U.S. Supreme Court review (per appellate jurisdiction) state court action in which the state itself is a party? –Is grant of original jdx where “state is a party” exclusive of appellate jdx? State could insulate itself from S.Ct. by initiating case in state or lower federal court –Is it a greater assault on state sovereignty to review state cases involving the state itself?

9. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review9 Federal Issues in State Cases Cause of action based on state law –can be filed in state court e.g., Virginia v. Cohens (penal law on gambling) e.g., Hunter v. Fairfax/ Devisee (quiet title) –can be filed in federal court diversity (protective jurisdiction) supplemental Federal issue enters case by way of defense or counter claim

10. Spring 2000Supreme Court Review10 Federal Claims in State Court Can state courts hear federal claims? –Courts of general jurisdiction Must state courts hear federal claims? –For federal law to be supreme, it must be enforceable in state as well as federal court What Rule of Decision do state courts follow when hearing federal claims?