What Are State Courts?

What Are State Courts?

State courts are the judicial institutions created and maintained by the individual states of the United States. They form the largest and most frequently used part of the American judicial system. While the federal courts exercise judicial power under the Constitution and federal statutes, state courts exercise judicial power under state constitutions and state law, subject to the U.S. Constitution and controlling federal law.

For most people, the state court system is the part of the judiciary they are most likely to encounter. Criminal prosecutions, divorces, child-custody disputes, probate proceedings, landlord-tenant conflicts, contract disputes, personal-injury claims, property controversies, traffic offenses, and many other legal matters are ordinarily handled in state courts.

State courts are therefore not secondary versions of federal courts. They are independent judicial systems with their own constitutions, statutes, procedural rules, judges, court structures, and bodies of precedent.

The relationship between state and federal courts is one of the defining features of American federalism. The United States does not have a single unified court system. Instead, it has a dual judicial structure consisting of a federal judiciary and the separate judiciaries of the fifty states.

To understand American law in practice, it is essential to understand what state courts are, what they do, and how they fit into the larger constitutional structure.

---

1. The Basic Meaning of a State Court

A state court is a court established under the authority of a particular state’s constitution, statutes, or both.

Every state has its own judicial system. Consequently, there is no single “U.S. state court” or unified national state-court hierarchy.

There are state courts in:

• Alabama;
• Alaska;
• Arizona;
• Arkansas;
• California;
• Colorado;
• Connecticut;
• Delaware;
• Florida;
• Georgia;
• Hawaii;
• Idaho;
• Illinois;
• Indiana;
• Iowa;
• Kansas;
• Kentucky;
• Louisiana;
• Maine;
• Maryland;
• Massachusetts;
• Michigan;
• Minnesota;
• Mississippi;
• Missouri;
• Montana;
• Nebraska;
• Nevada;
• New Hampshire;
• New Jersey;
• New Mexico;
• New York;
• North Carolina;
• North Dakota;
• Ohio;
• Oklahoma;
• Oregon;
• Pennsylvania;
• Rhode Island;
• South Carolina;
• South Dakota;
• Tennessee;
• Texas;
• Utah;
• Vermont;
• Virginia;
• Washington;
• West Virginia;
• Wisconsin; and
• Wyoming.

The District of Columbia and U.S. territories also have their own judicial arrangements, although they are not states.

Each state determines many important features of its own judiciary. It may establish different levels of courts, define their jurisdiction, prescribe procedures, determine how judges are selected, and create specialized courts.

As a result, there is considerable variation among state court systems.

---

2. Why Does the United States Have State Courts?

The existence of state courts follows from the federal structure of the United States.

The Constitution created a federal government with limited and enumerated powers while preserving substantial governmental authority for the states. The states did not disappear when the federal government was created. They remained sovereign governments within the constitutional system, subject to the U.S. Constitution and valid federal law.

Judicial power therefore exists at both levels.

The federal judiciary handles matters arising under federal authority and matters within federal jurisdiction. State judiciaries handle the enormous body of legal disputes governed by state constitutions and state laws.

This arrangement reflects federalism: governmental authority is divided between the national government and the states.

State courts are one of the principal institutions through which state sovereignty operates.

---

3. State Courts Are Courts of Law, Not Administrative Agencies

A state court should not be confused with an administrative agency.

A court is part of the judicial branch and performs judicial functions. It resolves legal disputes, interprets applicable law, determines rights and obligations, and enters judgments or other judicial orders.

Administrative agencies, by contrast, are generally part of the executive branch of government, although they may perform adjudicatory functions delegated by statute.

This distinction matters because an administrative tribunal may initially decide a dispute, while a state court may later review the agency’s action if state law permits judicial review.

State judicial systems therefore coexist with many other forms of governmental decision-making without becoming part of the executive bureaucracy.

---

4. What Do State Courts Do?

State courts perform many of the functions associated with courts generally.

They:

• resolve civil disputes;
• prosecute and adjudicate criminal cases;
• interpret state statutes;
• interpret state constitutions;
• apply common-law principles;
• determine legal rights and obligations;
• issue judgments and orders;
• conduct trials;
• oversee juries;
• review certain administrative decisions;
• hear appeals;
• supervise certain guardianship and protective proceedings;
• administer probate and estate matters; and
• provide judicial remedies when the law permits them.

The precise responsibilities vary from state to state.

A state court may therefore deal with something as ordinary as a traffic citation and something as constitutionally significant as whether a state statute violates the state’s constitution.

---

5. State Courts and State Law

One of the most important functions of state courts is interpreting and applying state law.

Every state has its own body of law.

That body may include:

• a state constitution;
• statutes enacted by the state legislature;
• regulations adopted by state agencies;
• judicial decisions;
• common-law principles;
• local laws and ordinances; and
• procedural and evidentiary rules.

State courts are frequently responsible for determining what these laws mean and how they apply to particular facts.

For example, suppose a state legislature passes a statute regulating residential leases. A dispute later arises between a landlord and tenant concerning the meaning of a particular provision.

A state court may have to determine:

1. what the statute means;
2. whether it applies to the particular lease;
3. whether other statutes affect the dispute;
4. whether prior judicial decisions have interpreted the provision;
5. what evidence is admissible; and
6. what remedy is available.

The resulting decision may become part of the state’s body of judicial precedent.

---

6. State Courts and State Constitutions

State courts also interpret their respective state constitutions.

This is an especially important feature of American constitutional law.

The U.S. Constitution establishes a national constitutional framework, but every state also has its own constitution.

A state constitution may contain rights and structural protections that resemble provisions of the U.S. Constitution. It may also contain protections that are more detailed or broader than their federal counterparts.

State courts, particularly state supreme courts, are therefore important constitutional courts in their own right.

For example, a state supreme court may be asked to determine whether a state statute violates:

• freedom of speech under the state constitution;
• due process under the state constitution;
• equal-protection guarantees;
• privacy protections;
• property rights;
• separation-of-powers provisions; or
• other state constitutional protections.

A state constitutional ruling may provide greater protection than federal constitutional law, provided it does not conflict with controlling federal constitutional requirements.

---

7. State Courts and the U.S. Constitution

State courts are not outside the federal constitutional system.

They are bound by the U.S. Constitution and by controlling federal law.

The Supremacy Clause establishes the constitutional principle that the Constitution and valid federal laws made pursuant to it are supreme over conflicting state law.

This means that a state court cannot lawfully enforce a state statute when the statute conflicts with controlling federal constitutional law or valid federal law.

At the same time, state courts regularly interpret and apply federal law.

This creates an important principle:

State courts are state institutions, but they operate within the national constitutional order.

A state judge may therefore decide questions involving:

• the U.S. Constitution;
• federal statutes;
• federal treaties;
• federal constitutional rights;
• federal evidentiary rules where applicable; or
• other matters of federal law within the court’s authority.

---

8. State Courts Can Hear Federal Questions

It is a mistake to assume that every federal question must be decided by a federal court.

State courts can, in appropriate circumstances, hear and decide questions of federal law.

For example, a state-court lawsuit may involve a federal constitutional defense or a federal statutory issue.

State courts are often described as having concurrent jurisdiction over certain federal matters unless Congress has made federal jurisdiction exclusive.

This principle reflects the practical reality of the American dual-court system.

A person does not necessarily have to go to federal court merely because a federal statute or constitutional provision is relevant to a dispute.

The precise availability of state-court jurisdiction depends on the nature of the claim, the governing statute, constitutional requirements, and any applicable rules concerning federal exclusivity.

---

9. State Courts Handle Most Ordinary Legal Disputes

The importance of state courts becomes especially clear when looking at the kinds of cases they handle.

Many disputes that affect ordinary life arise under state rather than federal law.

These include many cases involving:

Family Law

State courts commonly handle:

• divorce;
• child custody;
• child support;
• spousal support;
• adoption;
• guardianship; and
• other domestic-relations matters.

Property Law

State courts commonly decide disputes involving:

• ownership of land;
• boundaries;
• possession;
• leases;
• easements;
• mortgages in appropriate proceedings;
• real-estate contracts; and
• other property rights.

Contract Law

Many contract disputes arise under state contract law.

A lawsuit concerning a failed business agreement, construction contract, lease, sale of goods, or service agreement may therefore proceed in state court.

Tort Law

State courts hear enormous numbers of tort claims, including many disputes involving:

• negligence;
• automobile accidents;
• premises liability;
• professional negligence;
• defamation;
• trespass; and
• other civil wrongs.

Probate and Estates

State courts commonly supervise:

• wills;
• estates;
• inheritance disputes;
• executors and administrators;
• guardianships; and
• related proceedings.

Criminal Law

Most criminal prosecutions in the United States occur in state courts.

State criminal codes cover a vast range of offenses, from relatively minor offenses to serious felonies.

This means that state courts are central to the everyday operation of the American criminal-justice system.

---

10. State Trial Courts

Most state judicial systems begin with trial-level courts.

A state trial court is generally the court where a case is initially presented for judicial resolution.

Depending on the state, trial courts may have different names.

They may be called:

• superior courts;
• district courts;
• circuit courts;
• county courts;
• common pleas courts;
• municipal courts; or
• other names established by state law.

The terminology can therefore be confusing.

A “superior court” in one state may perform functions similar to a “district court” in another.

Likewise, the term “circuit court” does not necessarily refer to a federal court. Several states use the term for their own trial courts.

The important point is functional rather than linguistic: state trial courts are generally where evidence is presented, witnesses testify, factual disputes are resolved, and judgments are initially entered.

---

11. State Appellate Courts

State court systems generally also include appellate courts.

Their structure varies.

Some states have:

Trial Court → Intermediate Appellate Court → State Supreme Court

Others may have:

Trial Court → State Supreme Court

Some states also maintain separate appellate divisions or specialized appellate structures.

Appellate courts generally do not conduct an entirely new trial.

Instead, they review the lower court’s proceedings to determine whether a legal or procedural error occurred under the applicable standard of review.

They may affirm the judgment, reverse it, modify it, vacate it, or remand the case for further proceedings.

The state’s highest court ordinarily has the final word on questions of state law, subject to the possibility of review by the U.S. Supreme Court when a federal question is properly presented.

---

12. State Supreme Courts

Every state has a highest state court, although the name and structure differ.

Most are called the state supreme court.

New York is a famous exception: its highest court is called the New York Court of Appeals, while its trial-level courts include courts called Supreme Courts.

The highest state court generally serves as the ultimate judicial authority on questions of state law.

For example, if a state supreme court interprets a provision of its state’s constitution, lower courts within that state ordinarily must follow that interpretation.

State supreme courts also decide important questions involving:

• state statutes;
• common law;
• state constitutional rights;
• state court procedures;
• professional regulation;
• criminal law;
• civil liability;
• family law;
• property law; and
• other matters within the state’s judicial authority.

---

13. State Courts and Common Law

State courts are particularly important because much American law developed through judicial decisions.

The common-law tradition treats judicial decisions as an important source of legal rules and principles.

State courts continue to develop and apply common law in areas where legislative enactments have not displaced or modified it.

A court may therefore encounter a question for which there is no single statute providing a complete answer.

Judicial decisions may supply the governing rule.

This does not mean that judges possess unlimited authority to create whatever law they prefer. Judicial lawmaking operates within constitutional boundaries, statutory commands, precedent, procedural rules, and the institutional limits of the judicial branch.

Nevertheless, state courts remain important institutions in the continuing development of American common law.

For a useful explanation of the common-law tradition and related legal concepts, readers can consult Cornell Law School Legal Information Institute’s Wex materials on Common Law.

---

14. State Courts and Juries

State courts also play a major role in the American jury system.

In appropriate civil and criminal cases, juries may determine disputed questions of fact.

The judge and jury have different functions.

Generally speaking:

• the judge determines the law and manages the proceedings;
• the jury determines facts in cases submitted to it.

The precise allocation of responsibilities varies according to the type of case and the applicable law.

Criminal prosecutions frequently involve juries, particularly in serious cases. Civil cases may also involve juries when the applicable law provides for a jury trial and the necessary requirements are satisfied.

Juries therefore form an important part of state judicial institutions.

---

15. State Courts and the Rule of Law

State courts are fundamental to the rule of law because they provide institutional mechanisms for enforcing legal rights and resolving disputes according to established legal principles.

Without courts, a legal right could exist on paper without a practical mechanism for enforcement.

Suppose a person claims that another party breached a contract.

The existence of a legal rule alone does not necessarily resolve the dispute. A judicial institution may be needed to determine:

• whether a contract existed;
• whether it was breached;
• whether a defense applies;
• whether the plaintiff proved the necessary facts;
• whether damages resulted; and
• what remedy is legally available.

State courts provide this institutional mechanism in a vast range of disputes.

---

16. State Courts and Judicial Review

State courts can exercise judicial review under both federal and state constitutional principles.

A state court may determine that a state statute violates the state’s constitution.

It may also consider whether state governmental action violates the U.S. Constitution.

This makes state courts important participants in constitutional adjudication.

The United States therefore does not reserve all constitutional interpretation to the federal courts.

A state judge may have to decide a constitutional question as part of an ordinary state-court proceeding.

The distinction is that a state court interprets both state and federal law within the limits of its authority, while the U.S. Supreme Court possesses final authority over federal constitutional questions within its jurisdiction.

---

17. What Makes State Courts Different From Federal Courts?

The most fundamental difference is their constitutional foundation.

Federal courts derive their authority from the U.S. Constitution and federal law. State courts derive their authority primarily from state constitutions and state law.

That difference affects their structure, jurisdiction, procedure, and subject matter.

Federal courts generally operate within the limits of federal judicial jurisdiction established by Article III and federal statutes.

State courts ordinarily possess broader authority over matters arising under state law, although their authority is also limited by their own constitutions and statutes.

The distinction can be summarized this way:

State Courts	Federal Courts
Created under state authority	Created under federal authority
Primarily apply state law	Primarily apply federal law
Interpret state constitutions	Interpret the U.S. Constitution
Handle large volumes of state criminal cases	Handle federal criminal prosecutions
Commonly handle family and probate matters	Generally do not handle ordinary family or probate matters
Often have broad subject-matter authority under state law	Federal jurisdiction is limited by constitutional and statutory rules
Structure varies substantially by state	Federal structure is comparatively uniform
Highest court is generally the state supreme court	Highest court is the U.S. Supreme Court

This is a general comparison rather than an absolute division. State courts may apply federal law, and federal courts frequently apply state law.

---

18. State Courts Are Not Inferior to Federal Courts in Every Sense

The phrase “federal court” can sometimes create the mistaken impression that federal courts are inherently superior to state courts.

That is not an accurate description of the American judicial system.

Federal and state courts are separate judicial systems with different sources of authority.

A state supreme court is the highest judicial authority on questions of state law within that state.

For example, if the question is the meaning of a state statute and no federal issue is involved, the state’s highest court may have the final word.

The U.S. Supreme Court does not generally function as a nationwide appellate court for every question of state law.

Its authority over state-court judgments is primarily concerned with federal questions within its jurisdiction.

Thus, “higher” and “lower” should not be used carelessly when comparing federal and state courts.

The systems are separate but interconnected.

---

19. The U.S. Supreme Court and State Courts

The U.S. Supreme Court occupies a unique position in the relationship between the federal and state judiciaries.

When a state court decides a case involving a federal constitutional or federal-law question, the U.S. Supreme Court may have authority to review the decision if the constitutional and statutory requirements for Supreme Court review are satisfied.

But the Supreme Court does not ordinarily review state-court decisions merely because it disagrees with the state’s interpretation of its own law.

This distinction is crucial.

Suppose the highest court of a state interprets the meaning of a state statute.

If the dispute involves only state law, the state supreme court’s interpretation is ordinarily final.

If, however, the case also presents a substantial federal constitutional issue, Supreme Court review may become possible.

This structure preserves both federal supremacy and state judicial autonomy.

---

20. State Courts and Federalism

State courts are one of the practical foundations of federalism.

Federalism is not merely a theoretical division of governmental power.

It requires functioning institutions at both levels.

State courts allow states to maintain their own systems of:

• law;
• adjudication;
• judicial administration;
• constitutional interpretation;
• criminal justice;
• civil justice; and
• legal remedies.

At the same time, those systems operate within the national constitutional framework.

The result is not complete separation.

It is constitutional interaction.

State courts may apply federal law. Federal courts may apply state law. State and federal courts may sometimes have concurrent jurisdiction. Federal courts may review certain state-court judgments. State courts may decide federal constitutional questions.

The American judiciary is therefore best understood as a network of interacting judicial institutions rather than two completely isolated systems.

---

21. Why State Courts Matter So Much in Everyday Life

For an ordinary person, the distinction between state and federal courts is not merely academic.

It can affect where a lawsuit is filed, what law applies, what procedures govern the case, what court hears an appeal, and what remedies may be available.

Consider several examples.

A person injured in an automobile accident may bring a negligence action under state law.

A married couple seeking a divorce ordinarily proceeds through a state court.

A dispute over inheritance is generally handled through a state’s probate system.

A person charged with violating a state criminal statute is generally prosecuted in state court.

A dispute concerning ownership of land is ordinarily governed substantially by state property law.

A federal constitutional defense may nevertheless arise within one of these state proceedings.

The state judiciary is therefore not an abstract governmental institution. It is one of the primary mechanisms through which American law affects daily life.

---

22. State Court Systems Are Not Identical

One of the most important things to remember is that there is no single model of a state court system.

Each state has developed its judiciary within its own constitutional and legislative framework.

Differences may concern:

• the names of courts;
• the number of appellate levels;
• whether intermediate appellate courts exist;
• judicial selection;
• judicial terms;
• specialized courts;
• local court organization;
• procedural rules;
• jurisdictional divisions;
• jury procedures; and
• administrative structures.

For this reason, learning “state courts” requires understanding both the general pattern and the individual state’s system.

The next articles in this section will examine these structures in greater detail.

---

23. State Courts and Judicial Independence

State judges, like federal judges, must be able to decide cases according to law rather than simply according to political pressure.

But state judicial independence takes many forms.

Depending on the state, judges may be:

• appointed by the governor;
• appointed through a commission-based process;
• elected in partisan elections;
• elected in nonpartisan elections;
• retained through retention elections; or
• selected through other constitutional mechanisms.

State judicial tenure also varies considerably.

This creates a significant institutional difference between state and federal courts.

Federal Article III judges generally receive constitutional protection through good-Behaviour tenure, while state judicial terms and selection systems are determined primarily by state constitutional and statutory arrangements.

The subject of judicial selection is therefore particularly important when studying state courts.

---

24. State Courts as Constitutional Institutions

A state court is more than a place where lawsuits are processed.

It is a constitutional institution.

Judges exercise public authority. Courts interpret laws. Judicial decisions can affect individuals, businesses, governmental institutions, and entire communities.

At the highest level, state courts can determine the meaning of a state’s constitution and can invalidate state governmental action that violates constitutional requirements.

They therefore participate directly in the constitutional structure of American government.

The judiciary is not merely an administrative mechanism for settling private disagreements.

It is one of the institutions through which constitutional government operates.

---

25. The Importance of Understanding State Courts

A person studying American law cannot develop a complete understanding of the U.S. legal system without studying state courts.

Federal courts receive substantial attention because of the importance of federal constitutional law and the national role of the U.S. Supreme Court.

But state courts collectively handle an enormous share of American litigation and administer legal systems covering much of everyday American life.

They interpret state statutes, develop state common law, administer state criminal justice, resolve family and property disputes, supervise estates and guardianships, and protect rights under state constitutions.

Their decisions can also contribute to national legal developments, particularly when different state courts reach different conclusions on important questions or when state constitutional protections become models for broader legal debates.

State courts are therefore both local institutions and essential components of the national constitutional system.

---

Key Takeaways

• State courts are judicial institutions created under state authority.
• The United States has fifty separate state judicial systems, in addition to the federal judiciary.
• State courts primarily interpret and apply state constitutions, statutes, regulations, and common law.
• State courts also frequently interpret and apply federal law.
• Most everyday litigation in areas such as family law, property, contracts, torts, probate, and state criminal law occurs in state courts.
• State court systems differ significantly from one state to another.
• Most state systems contain some form of trial court, while many also have intermediate appellate courts and a highest state court.
• State supreme courts generally have the final word on questions of state law.
• State courts are bound by the U.S. Constitution and controlling federal law.
• State courts may decide federal constitutional questions when those questions arise within cases properly before them.
• State courts are not simply “lower versions” of federal courts; they are independent judicial systems with their own constitutional authority.
• The U.S. Supreme Court may review qualifying state-court decisions when they present appropriate federal questions.
• State courts are essential to federalism, constitutional government, and the rule of law.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Are state courts part of the federal judiciary?

No. State courts and federal courts belong to separate judicial systems.

State courts are established under state authority, while federal courts derive their authority from the U.S. Constitution and federal law.

---

Does every state have a state supreme court?

Every state has a highest state court, but it is not always called a “supreme court.” For example, New York’s highest court is called the Court of Appeals.

---

Can state courts decide federal law?

Yes. State courts can decide questions of federal law when those questions properly arise in cases within their authority, unless Congress has made federal jurisdiction exclusive.

---

Can a state court declare a state law unconstitutional?

Yes. State courts can determine that state legislation violates the state constitution. They may also determine that state governmental action violates the U.S. Constitution.

---

Can a state court apply the U.S. Constitution?

Yes. State judges are bound by the U.S. Constitution and may be required to interpret and apply federal constitutional provisions.

---

Is a state supreme court part of the U.S. Supreme Court system?

No. A state supreme court belongs to its state’s judiciary.

The U.S. Supreme Court is the highest court of the federal judiciary. A state supreme court is generally the highest court within its own state’s judicial system.

---

Can the U.S. Supreme Court overturn a state supreme court?

The U.S. Supreme Court can review qualifying judgments of state courts when a federal question falls within its jurisdiction. It does not generally act as an appellate court for purely state-law questions.

---

Are all state court systems organized in the same way?

No. States have considerable freedom to structure their own judiciaries. Court names, appellate structures, specialized courts, judicial selection methods, and procedures can vary significantly.

---

Do state courts handle criminal cases?

Yes. State courts handle the vast majority of criminal prosecutions involving violations of state criminal law.

Federal courts handle prosecutions for federal offenses.

---

Do state courts handle family-law cases?

Generally, yes. Divorce, child custody, child support, adoption, and many other domestic-relations matters are ordinarily handled by state courts.

---

Are state judges elected?

It depends on the state. Some states elect judges, while others use appointment systems or combinations of appointment and retention elections.

There is no single nationwide method for selecting state judges.

---

Conclusion

State courts are indispensable institutions of American law.

They represent the judicial authority of the individual states while operating within the larger constitutional framework created by the United States Constitution. Their responsibilities extend from ordinary disputes between private parties to major questions of constitutional interpretation.

Understanding state courts also reveals an important characteristic of American federalism: law in the United States is administered through multiple judicial systems that coexist, interact, and constrain one another.

Federal courts are essential to the national legal order, but state courts are equally fundamental to the practical operation of American justice.

To understand the American court system as a whole, therefore, one must understand not only the federal judiciary and the U.S. Supreme Court, but also the fifty state judiciaries that resolve an enormous range of legal disputes every day.