In the summer of 1787 the preliminary process of the Judicial system was addressed in the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia (Ewald, DATE). This Convention brought together two contradicting opinions, the southern states who believed the state courts could maintain balance amongst all cases and the northern federalist who believe a new court system was necessary for the continual growth of all cases (Glick, 1983, p.37). Glick (1983) explains the argument between the two groups were on the basis of creating a national court system with courts in which had a large amount of jurisdiction. Finally, a consensus was made amongst the delegates, the United States Supreme Court would have direct say over the Constitutional rulings and the
…show more content…
37). The discussion of the bill brought some the same controversies presented in the Constitutional Convention, but the main question of the federal court implementations still remained unanswered. Once again, the question would cause the Congress to be divided amongst two groups; one group expressing the view on the lower federal courts as an elimination of states rights and power, while the other feared that if the lower federal courts were not in existence than the people involved in lawsuits presented in other states or countries would not be treated justly. The consensus of the two groups came to defined judicial system in which Glick (1983) explains as the “...composed Supreme Court, consisting of a chief justice and five associate justices; three circuit courts, each composing two justices of the Supreme Court and a district judges; and thirteen district courts, each presided over by one district judge.” The consensus would soon allow for the Congress to exercise the expression of two lower courts, the district and appellate writes Carp and Stidham (1991, …show more content…
Established by the first congress, district courts are charged with hearing trials, hear actual evidence and in these cases have juries that decide the outcome (Wasby, 1988, p.45). Moving from thirteen colonies to fifty states, the district system has grown dependently. Today, Wasby (1988) explains there are 94 district courts representing the nation, each strategically placed within the states. Of all the states, twenty-six states and the District of Columbia have one district court while the rest have two to four residing district
37). The discussion of the bill brought some the same controversies presented in the Constitutional Convention, but the main question of the federal court implementations still remained unanswered. Once again, the question would cause the Congress to be divided amongst two groups; one group expressing the view on the lower federal courts as an elimination of states rights and power, while the other feared that if the lower federal courts were not in existence than the people involved in lawsuits presented in other states or countries would not be treated justly. The consensus of the two groups came to defined judicial system in which Glick (1983) explains as the “...composed Supreme Court, consisting of a chief justice and five associate justices; three circuit courts, each composing two justices of the Supreme Court and a district judges; and thirteen district courts, each presided over by one district judge.” The consensus would soon allow for the Congress to exercise the expression of two lower courts, the district and appellate writes Carp and Stidham (1991, …show more content…
Established by the first congress, district courts are charged with hearing trials, hear actual evidence and in these cases have juries that decide the outcome (Wasby, 1988, p.45). Moving from thirteen colonies to fifty states, the district system has grown dependently. Today, Wasby (1988) explains there are 94 district courts representing the nation, each strategically placed within the states. Of all the states, twenty-six states and the District of Columbia have one district court while the rest have two to four residing district