The United States has two separate court systems that work side by side. Federal courts handle cases tied to the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, and treaties. State courts handle cases tied to state constitutions and state laws.
Each system has its own structure, judges, and rules about which cases it can hear. Federal courts include 94 district courts, 13 courts of appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. Every state runs its own courts, usually with trial courts, appellate courts, and a state supreme court. Some states also have special courts for family matters, probate, or juvenile cases.
Knowing the difference matters because the type of court determines how a case moves forward, which laws apply, and even the possible sentence if it is a criminal case.
Recent changes in federal law, such as the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision ending Chevron deference, show how the federal courts’ role continues to shape the balance of power between states, Congress, and federal agencies.
Key Takeaways
- Federal courts deal with U.S. laws, constitutional questions, and disputes between states.
- State courts handle most crimes, family cases, contracts, and local disputes.
- Some crimes can be tried in both systems under dual sovereignty.
- Prosecutors choose whether a case goes to federal or state court when both apply.
Structure of Federal and State Courts
The United States follows a dual system of courts.
Federal courts are created by the Constitution and acts of Congress.
State courts are created by each state’s constitution and legislature.
Both systems operate independently, but they often interact when cases involve overlapping legal issues.
Federal Court System
The federal court system has a three-tier structure.
| Court Level | Function | Examples |
| U.S. Supreme Court | Final authority on federal constitutional law, with selective review of appeals | Decides constitutional challenges, federal statutes, and disputes between states |
| U.S. Courts of Appeals (13 circuits) | Reviews appeals from district courts, sets precedent within the circuit | 2nd Circuit (New York), 9th Circuit (California and Western states) |
| U.S. District Courts (94 total) | Federal trial courts, original jurisdiction over most federal cases | Northern District of Georgia, Southern District of New York |
Specialized federal courts include Bankruptcy Courts, the Court of International Trade, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. Magistrate judges assist with pretrial motions and limited trial matters.
A good example of how federal courts handle complex cases is the Paragard lawsuit. As of September 2025, more than 3,500 lawsuits involving the Paragard intrauterine device have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation (MDL No. 2974) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia.
State Court System
Each state organizes its courts differently, but most share a similar structure:
| Court Level | Function | Examples |
| State Supreme Court | Final authority on state law and constitution | California Supreme Court, Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
| Intermediate Court of Appeals (in most states) | Reviews appeals from trial courts | Florida District Courts of Appeal |
| Trial Courts | Handle criminal and civil cases under state law | Circuit Courts in Virginia, Superior Courts in Arizona |
| Specialized Courts | Limited subject matter jurisdiction | Probate courts, juvenile courts, family courts |
Key Differences in Structure
- Federal judges serve for life under “good behavior,” while state judges may be elected or appointed for terms.
- Federal courts have limited jurisdiction tied to the Constitution and federal statutes. State courts have general jurisdiction over most legal disputes.
- Federal courts are uniform nationwide, but state systems vary significantly.
How Judges Are Selected?
The method of choosing judges is one of the biggest differences between federal and state court systems.
Federal judges are appointed for life, while state judges are chosen in varied ways depending on the state’s constitution and laws.
Federal Judges
| Position | Selection Method | Term Length | Removal |
| U.S. Supreme Court Justice | Nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate | Life tenure during “good behavior” | Impeachment by Congress |
| Court of Appeals Judge | Nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate | Life tenure | Impeachment by Congress |
| District Court Judge | Nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate | Life tenure | Impeachment by Congress |
| Magistrate Judge | Appointed by District Court judges | Eight-year renewable term | Removal by District Court judges |
| Bankruptcy Judge | Appointed by the Courts of Appeals | Fourteen-year renewable term | Removal by Courts of Appeals |
Federal judges hold office under Article III of the Constitution (except magistrate and bankruptcy judges, who are Article I judges).
Their independence is guaranteed by lifetime tenure and salary protection.
State Judges
State judicial selection is not uniform. Each state chooses its own system, which may include election, appointment, or a combination of both.
| State Method | Examples | Term Length | Notes |
| Partisan Election | Texas, Alabama | 6 years (varies) | Candidates run with party affiliation |
| Nonpartisan Election | Michigan, Wisconsin | 6–10 years | Party label not shown on ballot |
| Gubernatorial Appointment | California (initially) | 12 years (varies) | Governor selects; voters later confirm in retention elections |
| Legislative Appointment | South Carolina, Virginia | 6–12 years | State legislature elects judges |
| Merit Selection (Missouri Plan) | Missouri, Arizona | Varies | Nonpartisan commission nominates candidates, the governor appoints, and voters later decide retention |
| Lifetime Appointment | Rhode Island | Life tenure | Rare among states |
Many states impose judicial age limits, requiring retirement between 70 and 75.
Key Differences
- Federal judges: Appointed, life tenure, insulated from political pressure.
- State judges: Wide variation. Elections can introduce politics into judicial campaigns, while merit-based systems try to balance independence with accountability.
- Impact of terms: Limited terms and mandatory retirement mean state judiciaries see more turnover than the federal system.
Jurisdiction of Federal Courts
Federal courts have limited jurisdiction, meaning they can only hear cases authorized by the Constitution and federal statutes.
Their authority is narrower than that of state courts, but cases often involve nationwide or constitutional importance.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
| Type of Jurisdiction | Explanation | Example |
| Federal Question | Cases arising under the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, or treaties | Civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 |
| Diversity Jurisdiction | Disputes between citizens of different states with more than $75,000 in controversy | California resident suing a Texas corporation for breach of contract |
| Admiralty and Maritime | Disputes involving navigation, shipping, or maritime contracts | Cargo damage during international shipping |
| Bankruptcy | Exclusive jurisdiction over bankruptcy filings | Chapter 7 or Chapter 13 bankruptcy petitions |
| United States as a Party | Cases where the U.S. government is plaintiff or defendant | Federal contract dispute |
| Treaties and Foreign Affairs | Cases involving ambassadors, consuls, or treaties | Dispute involving a foreign diplomat |
Criminal Jurisdiction
Federal courts prosecute crimes defined by federal law. These include:
- Drug trafficking (21 U.S.C. § 841)
- Firearm violations (18 U.S.C. § 922)
- Immigration offenses (illegal reentry, 8 U.S.C. § 1326)
- Terrorism and national security crimes
- Organized crime under RICO statutes
- Child exploitation and pornography cases
- White-collar fraud and cybercrime
Exclusive vs Concurrent Jurisdiction
- Exclusive jurisdiction: Certain matters, such as patents, bankruptcy, and federal tax disputes, can only be heard in federal courts.
- Concurrent jurisdiction: Some cases, like drug or gun offenses, can be brought in either state or federal court. Prosecutors decide the forum.
Appellate Jurisdiction
Federal courts of appeals review decisions from district courts.
The U.S. Supreme Court reviews appeals from federal appellate courts, and in limited situations, from state supreme courts if federal law or constitutional questions are involved.
Jurisdiction of State Courts
State courts have general jurisdiction, meaning they can hear almost any type of case unless federal law gives exclusive authority to federal courts.
This makes state courts the main forum for most criminal, civil, and family disputes in the United States.
Subject Matter Jurisdiction
| Case Type | Explanation | Example |
| Criminal Law | Most violent, property, and sex crimes are prosecuted under state law | Murder, robbery, assault, burglary |
| Family Law | Disputes involving domestic relationships and children | Divorce, child custody, adoption |
| Probate and Estates | Matters involving wills, trusts, and estates | Distribution of inheritance, guardianship |
| Contracts | Disputes over agreements under state law | Breach of a lease agreement |
| Torts | Civil lawsuits for personal injury or property damage | Car accident lawsuit, medical malpractice |
| Real Property | Disputes over land, property ownership, or zoning | Boundary disputes, landlord–tenant conflicts |
| Traffic and Local Violations | Infractions and misdemeanors under local or state code | Speeding tickets, DUI charges under state law |
Criminal Jurisdiction
State courts handle the vast majority of criminal prosecutions in the U.S.
Nearly all violent crimes are prosecuted in state courts, including:
- Murder and manslaughter
- Sexual assault and rape
- Burglary and theft
- Domestic violence
- Arson
Only certain crimes (like terrorism, major drug trafficking, or federal gun violations) are regularly prosecuted in federal court.
Exclusive State Jurisdiction
- Family law matters such as custody and adoption
- Probate cases involving wills and estates
- Local ordinance violations
- Property and zoning disputes are governed strictly by state law
Appeals in State Courts
- Trial court decisions may be appealed to an intermediate appellate court (in most states).
- The highest state court, usually called a State Supreme Court, has the final say on state law and constitutional interpretation.
- If a case involves a federal question, the U.S. Supreme Court may review the decision.
Crimes in Federal vs State Courts
Criminal cases are divided between federal and state systems depending on the law violated.
State courts handle the majority of prosecutions in the United States, but federal courts step in when crimes cross state lines, involve federal statutes, or raise national security concerns.
Comparison of Crimes
| Forum | Common Crimes Prosecuted | Example Statute or Case |
| Federal Courts | Drug trafficking, firearm violations, immigration crimes, terrorism, organized crime (RICO), cybercrime, bank robbery, child exploitation, large-scale fraud | 21 U.S.C. § 841 (drug distribution), 18 U.S.C. § 922 (firearms), 8 U.S.C. § 1326 (illegal reentry) |
| State Courts | Murder, rape, robbery, burglary, assault, arson, theft, local drug possession, DUI, domestic violence | State Penal Codes (e.g., California Penal Code § 187 for murder, Texas Penal Code § 22.01 for assault) |
Federal Crimes
Federal prosecutors focus on crimes that:
- Cross state or national borders (drug and human trafficking).
- Involve federal agencies or property (bank robbery involving FDIC-insured banks).
- Threaten national security (terrorism, espionage).
- Involve technology and commerce across state lines (cybercrime, securities fraud).
State Crimes
State prosecutors focus on crimes rooted in community safety and state laws:
- Violent crimes such as homicide, rape, and assault.
- Property crimes such as burglary, theft, and vandalism.
- Family-related crimes such as child abuse or domestic violence.
- Local drug possession and distribution charges not reaching federal thresholds.
Overlapping Crimes
Certain crimes may be prosecuted in either state or federal court:
- Firearm offenses involving both state and federal statutes.
- Drug distribution cases where both state and federal law apply.
- Fraud or identity theft impacting both local victims and interstate commerce.
In such situations, federal and state prosecutors decide where to proceed.
In rare cases, both systems prosecute the same conduct separately, which is permitted under the “dual sovereignty” doctrine.
Who Decides Where a Case Goes?
Jurisdiction sets the boundaries, but prosecutors decide which system will take the lead.
Federal prosecutors pursue cases involving interstate crime, federal property, constitutional rights, or specialized federal laws.
State prosecutors handle the vast majority of criminal and civil cases that arise under state statutes.
In rare instances, both federal and state prosecutors can bring charges under the dual sovereignty doctrine, leading to parallel trials in separate systems.
Key Elements Behind Court Selection
| Element | Federal Priority | State Priority |
| Geographic Scope | Crimes crossing state lines or on federal land | Events confined within state borders |
| Legal Basis | Federal statutes, constitutional issues | State statutes, local ordinances |
| Resources | National agencies like the FBI, DEA, and ATF | Local police, state crime labs |
| Public Interest | National security, interstate or international impact | Community-level impact |
Dual Sovereignty in Practice
The dual sovereignty principle allows both governments to prosecute the same act independently.
It is most often seen in civil rights prosecutions or high-profile crimes where federal law provides an added layer of accountability.
A clear example came after the 1991 beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles. State juries initially acquitted the police officers of assault charges, but federal prosecutors later brought civil rights charges in federal court. Two officers were convicted in 1993, showing how dual sovereignty can deliver a separate avenue for justice when state trials collapse.
Case Types by Jurisdiction
Federal and state courts divide authority based on the source of the law at issue.
Federal courts handle matters tied to the U.S. Constitution, congressional statutes, treaties, or disputes that cross state or national boundaries.
State courts oversee the vast majority of cases, including criminal prosecutions, family law, contract disputes, and property claims rooted in state law.
Federal Court Case Categories
- Constitutional challenges: disputes involving free speech, due process, or equal protection
- Federal crimes: drug trafficking, terrorism, immigration violations, bank robbery, child pornography
- Multi-state disputes: lawsuits between citizens of different states when large sums are involved
- Specialized areas: bankruptcy, patent law, maritime cases
State Court Case Categories
- Criminal prosecutions: murder, assault, robbery, theft, sex crimes
- Family law: marriage, divorce, custody, adoption
- Civil disputes: personal injury, contracts, landlord–tenant conflicts
- Probate and estates: wills, trusts, guardianship
Example: Boston Marathon Bombing
The prosecution of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev for the Boston Marathon bombing illustrates how federal jurisdiction applies.
Although murder and assault are usually handled by state courts, the case involved terrorism and the use of weapons of mass destruction, giving federal prosecutors authority.
He was convicted in federal court, which shows us how certain crimes fall squarely within national interest.
Sentencing Laws and Reforms
Sentencing policy differs sharply between state and federal systems.
Each state legislature writes its own sentencing codes, while Congress controls federal sentencing statutes.
Outcomes depend on the forum of prosecution, which explains why identical conduct can lead to significantly different sentences.
State-Level Sentencing Changes
- States often revise sentencing laws in response to local political or social pressure.
- For example, California and New York have reduced certain mandatory minimums in recent years, while other states, such as Texas, have increased penalties for fentanyl trafficking.
- Reform impact is confined within that state’s courts and benefits only those sentenced under its laws.
Federal Sentencing Reforms
- Congress sets mandatory minimums and sentencing guidelines for federal courts.
- In 2023, the First Step Act changes continued to influence sentence reductions, with retroactive provisions applying to some prisoners.
- Any new reforms passed by Congress apply only in federal cases, never in state courts.
Key Supreme Court Updates in 2025
The Supreme Court serves as the ultimate arbiter when conflicts between state and federal authority arise.
In 2025, several decisions clarified jurisdictional reach and the rights of defendants.
Major Decisions in 2025
- United States v. Rahimi (2025): The Court upheld restrictions on firearm possession for individuals under domestic violence restraining orders, reinforcing the federal government’s authority to regulate firearms even when states vary on enforcement.
- Smith v. United States (2025): Addressed double jeopardy concerns in the application of dual sovereignty, reaffirming that state and federal prosecutions for the same conduct do not violate the Constitution.
- Doe v. Texas (2025): Clarified the interaction between state immigration enforcement efforts and federal supremacy, ruling that states cannot create parallel deportation procedures.
FAQs
Bottom Line
Federal and state courts each have their own powers, structures, and rules.
Federal courts focus on U.S. laws and national issues, while state courts handle the majority of everyday cases under state laws.
Some crimes or disputes can involve both systems, depending on the law.
Knowing which court has authority matters because it affects how cases are handled, what laws apply, and the possible outcomes.