query: who is given the power to establish the inferior courts of the federal system

pos: Federal judiciary of the United States corpus. Federal judiciary of the United States The federal judiciary of the United States is one of the three branches of the federal government of the United States organized under the United States Constitution and laws of the federal government. Article III of the Constitution requires the establishment of a Supreme Court and permits the Congress to create other federal courts, and place limitations on their jurisdiction. Article III federal judges are appointed by the President with the consent of the Senate to serve until they resign, are impeached and convicted, retire or die. The federal courts are composed of

pos: Supreme court a general outline of the judiciary, vesting of federal judicial power in "one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." They delineated neither the exact powers and prerogatives of the Supreme Court nor the organization of the Judicial Branch as a whole. Some countries have multiple "supreme courts" whose respective jurisdictions have different geographical extents, or which are restricted to particular areas of law. Some countries with a federal system of government may have both a federal supreme court (such as the Supreme Court of the United States), and

pos: Sheldon v. Sill Sheldon v. Sill Sheldon v. Sill, 49 U.S. (8 How.) 441 (1850), is a ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that Congress may restrict the jurisdiction of the lower federal courts by limiting the subjects those courts may hear, even if those subjects fall within the federal judicial power defined by the United States Constitution. Article III of the Constitution vests "the Judicial Power of the United States...in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish," and extends the jurisdiction of said courts to: all

pos: Article One of the United States Constitution power to coin and regulate money, the power to establish federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, the power to raise and support military forces, and the power to declare war. Section 8 also provides Congress the power to establish a federal district to serve as the national capital, and gives Congress the exclusive power to administer that district. In addition to various enumerated powers, Section 8 grants Congress the power to make laws necessary and proper to carry out its enumerated powers and other powers vested in it. Section 9 places various limits on the power of Congress, banning

pos: Court of Appeals in Cases of Capture in 1789 that transferred federal judicial power to the newly created U.S. Supreme Court and such other inferior (i.e., lower) federal courts as Congress may establish. Beginning with Massachusetts on November 1, 1775, several of the American colonies (and, later, states) established prize courts to exercise original jurisdiction over all cases (or libels) of captures (or prizes) consisting of enemy ships and cargo. Establishment of such courts was recommended by Congress on November 25. 1775. On November 25, 1775, Congress also asserted federal appellate jurisdiction over such cases. Following repeated scheduling difficulties when Congress attempted to hear the first appeal,

pos: Judiciary Act of 1789 Judiciary Act of 1789 The Judiciary Act of 1789 (ch. 20, ) was a United States federal statute adopted on September 24, 1789, in the first session of the First United States Congress. It established the federal judiciary of the United States. Article III, of the Constitution prescribed that the "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and such inferior Courts" as Congress saw fit to establish. It made no provision for the composition or procedures of any of the courts, leaving this to Congress to decide. The existence of a separate federal judiciary

pos: Federal judiciary of the United States States court was established for the Northwest Territory. When the Constitution came into force in 1789, Congress gained the authority to establish the federal judicial system as a whole. Only the Supreme Court was established by the Constitution itself. The Judiciary Act of 1789 created the first inferior (i.e., lower) federal courts established pursuant to the Constitution and provided for the first Article III judges. Virtually all U.S. law schools offer an elective course that focuses specifically on the powers and limitations of U.S. federal courts, with coverage of topics such as justiciability, abstention doctrines, the abrogation doctrine, and habeas

pos: Judiciary Act of 1789 Supreme Court. Judiciary Act of 1789 The Judiciary Act of 1789 (ch. 20, ) was a United States federal statute adopted on September 24, 1789, in the first session of the First United States Congress. It established the federal judiciary of the United States. Article III, of the Constitution prescribed that the "judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and such inferior Courts" as Congress saw fit to establish. It made no provision for the composition or procedures of any of the courts, leaving this to Congress to decide. The existence of a separate

pos: Common law judiciary to review and invalidate unconstitutional acts of the federal executive branch is stated in the constitution, Article III sections 1 and 2: "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. ... The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority..." The first landmark decision on "the judicial power" was "Marbury v. Madison", .

pos: Separation of powers under the United States Constitution always prescribe regulations governing executive officers. Judicial power—the power to decide cases and controversies—is vested in the Supreme Court and inferior courts established by Congress. The judges must be appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the Senate, hold office during good behavior and receive compensations that may not be diminished during their continuance in office. If a court's judges do not have such attributes, the court may not exercise the judicial power of the United States. Courts exercising the judicial power are called "constitutional courts." Congress may establish "legislative courts," which do not take the form

pos: Supreme Court of the United States a general outline of the judiciary, vesting of federal judicial power in "one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." They delineated neither the exact powers and prerogatives of the Supreme Court nor the organization of the Judicial Branch as a whole. The 1st United States Congress provided the detailed organization of a federal judiciary through the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Supreme Court, the country's highest judicial tribunal, was to sit in the nation's Capital, and would initially be composed of a Chief Justice and five associate justices.

pos: Sheldon v. Sill if the Constitution had ordained and established the inferior courts, and distributed to them their respective powers, they could not be restricted or divested by Congress. But . . . it has made no such distribution . . . [Consequentially, ] Congress, having the power to establish the courts, must define their [the inferior courts'] respective jurisdictions. In "Sheldon", then, the Supreme Court ruled that: Congress may withhold from any court of its creation jurisdiction of any of the enumerated controversies. Courts created by statute can have no jurisdiction but such as the statute confers. No one of them can

pos: Jurisdiction stripping Jurisdiction stripping In the United States, jurisdiction-stripping (also called court-stripping or curtailment-of-jurisdiction), is the limiting or reducing of a court's jurisdiction by Congress through its constitutional authority to determine the jurisdiction of federal and state courts. Congress may define the jurisdiction of the judiciary through the simultaneous use of two powers. First, Congress holds the power to create (and, implicitly, to define the jurisdiction of) federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court (i.e. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and various other Article I and Article III tribunals). This court-creating power is granted both in the congressional powers clause (Art. I,

pos: Bank Markazi v. Peterson legislatures in judicial matters "figur[ed] prominently in the Framers' decision to devise a system for securing liberty through the division of power." This resulted in Article Three of the United States Constitution, which forms the "central pillar of judicial independence" and places "'[t]he judicial Power of the United States' ... in 'one supreme Court', and in such 'inferior Courts'" as Congress may establish. This judicial power extends "to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority." The Chief Justice explained that

pos: Louisiana Supreme Court of Orleans. In 1804, Congress created a three-judge Superior Court for the territory and gave the Legislative Council the power to create other courts. In 1807, the newly-elected Legislative Council created courts in each of the territory's nineteen parishes. These courts were courts of general jurisdiction with an appeal applying to the Superior Court. In the first Constitution for the state of Louisiana, one Supreme Court was created and the Legislature was given the power to create inferior courts. The number of judges was fixed to be not less than three and not more than five who were to be

pos: Federal tribunals in the United States States Constitution from which the tribunal's authority stems. The use of the term "tribunal" in this context as a blanket term to encompass both courts and other adjudicative entities comes from section 8 of Article I of the Constitution, which expressly grants Congress the power to constitute tribunals inferior to the U.S. Supreme Court. Article III courts (also called Article III tribunals) are the U.S. Supreme Court and the inferior courts of the United States established by the Congress, which currently are the 13 United States courts of appeals, the 91 United States district courts (including the districts of D.C.

pos: Jurisdiction stripping by Washburn University Law Professor Alex Glashausser. On the other hand, Judge William A. Fletcher wrote an article in 2010 taking the opposite point of view. Generally speaking, the word "power" is not necessarily synonymous with the word "jurisdiction". For instance, courts will often assert a modest degree of power over a case for purposes of determining whether it has jurisdiction, or for purposes of receiving jurisdiction. The Constitution vests the judicial power "in one supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time establish" (emphasis added). Scholars have debated whether the word "in"

pos: Common law Later cases interpreted the "judicial power" of Article III to establish the power of federal courts to consider or overturn any action of Congress or of any state that conflicts with the Constitution. The interactions between decisions of different courts is discussed further in the article on precedent. The United States federal courts are divided into twelve regional circuits, each with a circuit court of appeals (plus a thirteenth, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which hears appeals in patent cases and cases against the federal government, without geographic limitation). Decisions of one circuit court are binding on

pos: Powers of the United States Congress about the extent of congressional versus presidential power regarding war has been present periodically throughout the nation's history. Congress also has the power to establish post offices and post roads, issue patents and copyrights, fix standards of weights and measures, establish courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and "To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof." Article Four gives Congress the power to admit new states into the Union.

pos: Circuit split Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." In 1789, Congress created the first system of intermediate appellate courts, known as federal circuit courts, which had appellate jurisdiction over certain matters decided by District Courts. These federal circuit courts consisted of two justices from the Supreme Court of the United States and one district court judge. In 1891, Congress created the existing system of United States courts of appeals, which hear appeals from United States district courts within limited geographic areas. For example, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit hears appeals originating

pos: Article Three of the United States Constitution that is explicitly established by the Constitution. During the Constitutional Convention, a proposal was made for the Supreme Court to be the only federal court, having both original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction. This proposal was rejected in favor of the provision that exists today. Under this provision, the Congress may create inferior (i.e., lower) courts under both Article III, Section 1, and Article I, Section 8. The Article III courts, which are also known as "constitutional courts", were first created by the Judiciary Act of 1789, and are the only courts with judicial power. Article I courts, which are also

pos: Sheldon v. Sill or Subjects. Congress exercised its power to "ordain and establish" such inferior Courts, the circuit courts, in the Judiciary Act of 1789. However: The eleventh section of the Judiciary Act, which defines the jurisdiction of the Circuit Courts, restrains them from taking 'cognizance of any suit to recover the contents of any promissory note or other chose in action, in favor of an assignee, unless a suit might have been prosecuted in such court to recover the contents, if no assignment had been made, except in cases of foreign bills of exchange' . . . It must be admitted, that

pos: Federal common law the courts power to develop substantive law, and areas where a federal rule of decision is necessary to protect uniquely federal interests. The U.S. Congress has given courts power to formulate common law rules in areas such as admiralty law, antitrust, bankruptcy law, interstate commerce, and civil rights. Congress often lays down broad mandates with vague standards, which are then left to the courts to interpret, and these interpretations eventually give rise to complex understandings of the original intent of Congress, informed by the courts' understanding of what is just and reasonable. Furthermore, in the 1943 case of "Clearfield Trust

pos: Article Three of the United States Constitution Article Three of the United States Constitution Article Three of the United States Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the federal government. Under Article Three, the judicial branch consists of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as lower courts created by Congress. Article Three empowers the courts to handle cases or controversies arising under federal law, as well as other enumerated areas. Article Three also defines treason. Section 1 of Article Three vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court, as well as inferior courts established by Congress. Along with the Vesting Clauses

pos: Judiciary Act of 1789 had been controversial during the debates over the ratification of the Constitution. Anti-Federalists had denounced the judicial power as a potential instrument of national tyranny. Indeed, of the ten amendments that eventually became the Bill of Rights, five (the fourth through the eighth) dealt primarily with judicial proceedings. Even after ratification, some opponents of a strong judiciary urged that the federal court system be limited to a Supreme Court and perhaps local admiralty judges. The Congress, however, decided to establish a system of federal trial courts with broader jurisdiction, thereby creating an arm for enforcement of national laws within each

pos: United States Congress weights and measures, establish Courts inferior to the Supreme Court, and "make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof." Article Four gives Congress the power to admit new states into the Union. One of Congress's foremost non-legislative functions is the power to investigate and oversee the executive branch. Congressional oversight is usually delegated to committees and is facilitated by Congress's subpoena power. Some critics have charged that Congress has in

pos: Federal government of the United States name special, or select, committees to study specific problems. Today, much of the congressional workload is borne by the subcommittees, of which there are around 150. The Constitution grants numerous powers to Congress. Enumerated in Article I, Section 8, these include the powers to levy and collect taxes; to coin money and regulate its value; provide for punishment for counterfeiting; establish post offices and roads, issue patents, create federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, combat piracies and felonies, declare war, raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, make rules for the regulation of land and naval forces,

pos: Article Three of the United States Constitution or that the individual accused of treason confesses. It also limits the ways in which Congress can punish those convicted of treason. Section 1 vests the judicial power of the United States in federal courts, requires a supreme court, allows inferior courts, requires good behavior tenure for judges, and prohibits decreasing the salaries of judges. Article III authorizes one Supreme Court, but does not set the number of justices that must be appointed to it. Article I, Section 3, Clause 6 refers to a "Chief Justice" (who shall preside over the impeachment trial of the President of the United States).

pos: Federal government of the United States Protection Agency (EPA), and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). In addition, there are government-owned corporations such as the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the National Railroad Passenger Corporation. The Judiciary explains and applies the laws. This branch does this by hearing and eventually making decisions on various legal cases. Article III section I of the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court of the United States and authorizes the United States Congress to establish inferior courts as their need shall arise. Section I also establishes a lifetime tenure for all federal judges and states that their compensation may not

pos: United States Constitution review over the actions of Congress or the executive branch. Two conflicting federal laws are under "pendent" jurisdiction if one presents a strict constitutional issue. Federal court jurisdiction is rare when a state legislature enacts something as under federal jurisdiction. To establish a federal system of national law, considerable effort goes into developing a spirit of comity between federal government and states. By the doctrine of 'Res judicata', federal courts give "full faith and credit" to State Courts. The Supreme Court will decide Constitutional issues of state law only on a case by case basis, and only by strict Constitutional

pos: Confederation Period the legislature, and hold broad powers over foreign affairs, military policy, and appointments. The president also received the power to veto legislation. The judicial power of the United States would be vested in the Supreme Court of the United States and any inferior courts established by Congress, and these courts would have jurisdiction over federal issues. The amendment process would no longer require unanimous consent of the states, although it still required the approval of Congress and a majority of states. Though the Philadelphia Convention had succeeded in its goal of producing a new constitution, ratification of the Constitution was

pos: Federal jurisdiction (United States) power to enact laws "respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States." Federal jurisdiction exists over any territory thus subject to laws enacted by the Congress. The American legal system includes both state courts and federal courts. State courts hear cases involving state law, and such federal laws as are not restricted to hearing in federal courts. Federal courts may only hear cases where federal jurisdiction can be established. Specifically, the court must have both subject-matter jurisdiction over the matter of the claim and personal jurisdiction over the parties. The Federal Courts are courts of limited jurisdiction,

pos: Emergency Price Control Act of 1942 meat sellers sued to prevent the US Attorney from prosecuting them if they violated the price regulations. Among many arguments, one was that Congress lacked the authority to "carve up" jurisdiction in this form. Pursuant to the Act, the district court dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal, writing that "[t]he Congressional power to ordain and establish inferior courts includes the power of investing them with jurisdiction either limited, concurrent, or exclusive, and of withholding jurisdiction from them in exact degrees and character which to Congress may seem proper for the public good." That

pos: Traditional courts in Malawi extensive use of courts as part of his efforts to establish traditional systems in Malawi. The Traditional courts eventually became the primary means of law enforcement in Malawi. In these courts, prosecutors had much greater power than in the parallel High Court system. Two high-profile cases show how the system of traditional courts was manipulated to silence opponents of the Banda government. Perhaps the most flagrant misuse of the Traditional Court system occurred in the trial in 1976 of Albert Muwalo (also known as Albert Muwalo Nqumayo), Secretary General of the Malawi Congress Party and Focus Gwede, Head of the

pos: Cooperative federalism government to require implementation by a State executive branch, or its local political subdivisions, that limitation does not apply in the same way to State judicial systems. In part, this is because the founders understood that state courts would be courts of general jurisdiction, bound to apply both state and federal law. In part, it is because the State courts adjudicate cases between citizens who are bound to comply with both state and federal law. When the Congress seeks to establish federal legislation which governs the behavior of citizens, the Congress is free to choose among three judicial enforcement paradigms.

pos: Federal government of the United States Federal government of the United States The Federal Government of the United States (U.S. Federal Government) is the national government of the United States, a federal republic in North America, composed of 50 states, a federal district, five major self-governing territories, and several island possessions. The federal government is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, whose powers are vested by the U.S. Constitution in the Congress, the President, and the federal courts, respectively. The powers and duties of these branches are further defined by acts of congress, including the creation of executive departments and courts inferior to

pos: United States constitutional law and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, among many other positions. Under the modern interpretation of "advice and consent," a presidential appointment must be confirmed by majority vote in the Senate in order to take effect. Thus, in practice, the President holds the power to nominate, while the Senate holds the power to confirm. Article II, Section 2 gives Congress the discretion to vest the appointment of "inferior officers" in either the President alone, the heads of departments, or the lower federal courts. Congress may not appropriate this role for itself, and Senate confirmation is not required for these positions.

pos: Michael Mukasey instead advocated for Congress, which "has the constitutional authority to establish additional inferior courts," to "turn [its] considerable talents to deliberating how to fix a strained and mismatched legal system." On September 17, 2007, Mukasey was nominated by President Bush to replace Alberto Gonzales as the Attorney General. At his nomination press conference with the President, Mukasey stated, "The task of helping to protect our security, which the Justice Department shares with the rest of our government, is not the only task before us. The Justice Department must also protect the safety of our children, the commerce that assures our

pos: Coram nobis wider range of topics. This sovereignty allows each judicial system to decide whether to adopt writs and the function and purpose of each writ it adopts. Thus, the use and application of writs, including the writ of coram nobis, can vary within each of these judicial systems. Legislation authorizes a judicial system to issue the writ of coram under one of two conditions: In 1789, Congress passed the Judiciary Act to establish the judicial courts in the United States. This Act also allows courts to issue writs, including the writ of coram nobis. Originally, federal courts applied the writ of

neg: Law of Canada First Nation reserves), and property and civil rights. The "Constitution Act, 1867" also provides that, while provinces establish their own superior courts, the federal government appoints their judges. It also gives the federal Parliament the right to establish a court system responsible for federal law and a general court of appeal to hear appeals of decisions of both federal and provincial courts. This last power resulted in the federal Parliament's creation of the Supreme Court of Canada, which is, despite its role as supreme arbiter of all Canadian law, a creation of simple, rather than constitutional, statute. The "Constitution Act,

neg: Law of the United States accepted that the Founding Fathers of the United States, by vesting "judicial power" into the Supreme Court and the inferior federal courts in Article Three of the United States Constitution, thereby vested in them the implied judicial power of common law courts to formulate persuasive precedent; this power was widely accepted, understood, and recognized by the Founding Fathers at the time the Constitution was ratified. Several legal scholars have argued that the federal judicial power to decide "cases or controversies" necessarily includes the power to decide the precedential effect of those cases and controversies. The difficult question is whether federal

neg: Montana day. Senators serve four-year terms, while Representatives serve two-year terms. All members are limited to serving no more than eight years in a single 16-year period. The Courts of Montana are established by the Constitution of Montana. The constitution requires the establishment of a Montana Supreme Court and Montana District Courts, and permits the legislature to establish Justice Courts, City Courts, Municipal Courts, and other inferior courts such as the legislature sees fit to establish. The Montana Supreme Court is the court of last resort in the Montana court system. The constitution of 1889 provided for the election of no

neg: Article Three of the United States Constitution of Article One and Article Two, Article Three's Vesting Clause establishes the separation of powers between the three branches of government. Section 1 authorizes the creation of inferior courts, but does not require it; the first inferior federal courts were established shortly after the ratification of the Constitution with the Judiciary Act of 1789. Section 1 also establishes that federal judges do not face term limits, and that an individual judge's salary may not be decreased. Article Three does not set the size of the Supreme Court or establish specific positions on the court, but Article One establishes the position

neg: Federal courts (Germany) crimes of war and crimes against humanity. This is currently implemented by making Oberlandesgerichte the first instance for such cases, with appeals being to the Federal Court of Justice. Federal courts (Germany) In Germany, federal courts ("Bundesgerichte", singular "Bundesgericht") are courts which are established by federal law. According to article 92 of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, the judiciary power is exercised by the Federal Constitutional Court, the federal courts provided for in the Basic Law, and the courts of the Länder (Landesgerichte). The federal courts are: It is also possible to establish "military criminal courts"

neg: Federal courts (Germany) Federal courts (Germany) In Germany, federal courts ("Bundesgerichte", singular "Bundesgericht") are courts which are established by federal law. According to article 92 of the Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, the judiciary power is exercised by the Federal Constitutional Court, the federal courts provided for in the Basic Law, and the courts of the Länder (Landesgerichte). The federal courts are: It is also possible to establish "military criminal courts" for exercising criminal jurisdiction during a state of defence or over members of the Bundeswehr serving abroad, however the federal legislature has so far not done so. A ""

neg: Precedent it is divided into four appellate departments supervised by the final New York Court of Appeals. Decisions of one appellate department are not binding upon another, and in some cases the departments differ considerably on interpretations of law. In federal systems the division between federal and state law may result in complex interactions. In the United States, state courts are not considered inferior to federal courts but rather constitute a parallel court system. In practice, however, judges in one system will almost always choose to follow relevant case law in the other system to prevent divergent results and to minimize

neg: Legal system of the United Arab Emirates Legal system of the United Arab Emirates The judicial system in the United Arab Emirates is based on the British law, civil law system with influences from Islamic, French, Roman and Egyptian laws. Under the Constitution, each Emirate is allowed to either establish its own judiciary or to merge with the federal court system. Federal Court System The UAE federal system includes courts of first instance (trial court), courts of appeal and the court of cassation (Supreme Court). State Court System The State (or Emirate) judicial system (النظام القضائي المحلي "local judicial system") has also trial, appeal and cassation courts.

neg: Montana inferior courts as whatever other inferior courts it deemed necessary. Section 5 specifically required there to be at least one Justice Court and Justice of the Peace in each county, and for justices of the peace to be elected. It also authorized the legislature to give Justice Courts whatever jurisdiction the legislature deemed fit, although the constitution barred Justice Courts from hearing any felony cases except during preliminary hearings. Section 9 allowed the legislature to define the method of selection for non-justice inferior courts, and to establish the qualifications for office for all inferior courts. Section 10 barred any inferior court judge

neg: Concurrent powers can therefore be divided into two kinds: those not generally subject to federal preemption (like the power to tax private citizens); and, other concurrent powers. In the United States, examples of the concurrent powers shared by both the federal and state governments include the power to tax, build roads, establish bankruptcy laws, and to create lower courts. Concurrent powers Concurrent powers are powers a federal system of government shared by both the federal government and each constituent political unit (such as a state or province). These powers may be exercised simultaneously within the same territory, in relation to the same

neg: Government procurement in the United States contractor. The authority to purchase is not one of the explicitly enumerated powers given to the Federal Government by Section 8 of Article One of the United States Constitution, but courts found that power implicit in the Constitutional power to make laws that are necessary and proper for executing its specifically granted powers, such as the powers to establish post offices, post roads, banks, an army, a navy, or militias. Behind any Federal Government acquisition is legislation that permits it and provided money for it. These are normally covered in authorization and appropriation legislation. Generally, this legislation does not affect

neg: United States constitutional law and executive branches of the federal government, on the lower courts in the federal system, and on all state courts. This system of binding interpretations or precedents evolved from the common law system (called "stare decisis"), where courts are bound by their own prior decisions and by the decisions of higher courts. While neither English common law courts nor continental civil law courts generally had the power to declare legislation unconstitutional (only the power to change law), the United States Supreme Court has long been understood to have the power to declare federal or state legislation unconstitutional. Before deciding a

neg: Judiciary of Australia court' (or 'superior court of record'). In many respects Australian superior courts are similar to the Senior Courts of England and Wales. In Australia, superior courts generally: Inferior courts are those beneath superior courts in the appellate hierarchy, and are generally seen to include the Magistrates and District (or County) Court of each State as well as the Federal Circuit Court. Inferior courts are typically characterised by: These courts among them have jurisdiction over Commonwealth law, that is, law made by the Federal parliament of Australia. The High Court is the highest court in Australia. It was created by section

neg: Law of Australia determine disputes about whether a law is within power and consistent with the Constitution. Chapter III of the Constitution required the creation of the High Court of Australia, and confers power to establish other federal courts and to vest federal jurisdiction in State courts. Australian courts could permit an appeal to the Privy Council on constitutional matters. The right of appeal from the High Court to the Privy Council was only abolished in 1975, and from State courts in 1986. Australia does not have a constitutional bill of rights and there are few express rights guaranteed by the Constitution. However,

neg: Nullification (U.S. Constitution) given the power to determine whether federal laws are consistent with the Constitution, with the Supreme Court having final authority. Thus, the federal courts have held that under the Constitution, federal law is controlling over state law, and the final power to determine whether federal laws are unconstitutional has been delegated to the federal courts. The courts therefore have held that the states do not have the power to nullify federal law. The concept of nullification of federal law by the states was not discussed at the Constitutional Convention. The records of the Constitutional Convention therefore do not provide support

neg: Constitution Act, 1867 Canada are all created under the second branch, i.e. as "additional Courts for the better Administration of the Laws of Canada". Section 92(14) gives the provincial legislatures the power over the "Constitution, Maintenance, and Organization of Provincial Courts, both of Civil and of Criminal Jurisdiction". This power includes the creation of both the superior courts, both of original jurisdiction and appeal, as well as inferior tribunals. Superior courts are known as "courts of inherent jurisdiction", as they receive their constitutional authority from historical convention inherited from the United Kingdom. Section 96 authorizes the federal government to appoint judges for "the

neg: Court system of Canada expressly or implicitly referred to in its enabling or empowering statute. Judges in Canada are appointed and not elected. Judges of the Supreme Court of Canada, the federal courts, the appellate courts and the superior-level courts are appointed by the Governor-in-Council (by the Governor General on the advice of the Federal Cabinet). For example, judges of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice are chosen not by Ontario's provincial government but upon the recommendations of Her Majesty's Canadian Government. Meanwhile, judicial appointments to judicial posts in the so-called "inferior" or "provincial" courts are made by the local provincial governments. As judicial

neg: Court system of Canada the peace who did not necessarily have formal legal training. However, today all judges are legally trained, although justices of the peace may not be. Many inferior courts have specialized functions, such as hearing only criminal law matters, youth matters, family law matters, small claims matters, "quasi-criminal" offences (i.e., violations of provincial statutes), or bylaw infractions. In some jurisdictions these courts serve as an appeal division from the decisions of administrative tribunals. In addition to the Supreme Court of Canada, there are three civil courts created by the federal Parliament under its legislative authority under section 101 of the "Constitution

neg: Montana District Courts establish inferior courts only in incorporated cities or towns, and the District Courts were required to hear appeals "de novo". The new constitution also authorized the legislature to establish a right to appeal the decisions of state agencies directly to district courts. Impeachment powers were changed as well. Now the Montana Senate and the Montana House of Representatives jointly vested with impeachment powers. The entire legislature could now specify the criteria for impeachment, establish whatever tribunal it wished, and provide for the procedures for impeachment. District Courts in Montana have both original and appellate jurisdiction. Each District Court's process extends

neg: Constitution Act, 1867 conflict, federal law prevails. The authority over the judicial system in Canada is divided between Parliament and the provincial Legislatures. Section 101 gives Parliament power to create a "general court of appeal for Canada" and "additional Courts for the better Administration of the Laws of Canada". Parliament has used this power to create the Supreme Court of Canada and lower federal courts. It has created the Supreme Court under both branches of s. 101. The lower federal courts, such as the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Tax Court of Canada and the Court Martial Appeal Court of

neg: Supreme court is the "de facto" highest German court, as it can declare both federal and state legislation ineffective, and has the power to overrule decisions of all other federal courts, despite not being a regular court of appeals on itself in the German court system. It is also the only court possessing the power and authority to outlaw political parties. When it comes to civil and criminal cases, the "Bundesgerichtshof" (Federal Court of Justice) is at the top of the hierarchy of courts. The other branches of the German judicial system each have their own appellate systems, each topped by a

neg: Judicial review in Switzerland in drafting the statute at issue. The reason traditionally given for the lack of judicial review is the Swiss system of popular democracy: If 50,000 citizens so demand, any new statute is made subject to a popular referendum. In this sense, it is the people themselves that exercise review. The situation described above for Swiss federal law applies "mutatis mutandis" to the constitutional and legal systems of the individual cantons. However, owing to the derogatory power of federal law, federal courts as a matter of course exercise judicial review on cantonal law, as well as on federal executive law (ordinances,

neg: Judiciary of Malta Judiciary of Malta The judiciary of Malta interprets and applies the laws of Malta, to ensure equal justice under law, and to provide a mechanism for dispute resolution. The legal system of is based partially on English law and partly on Continental law, whilst also being subject to European Union law. The judiciary is defined by the Constitution of Malta as a hierarchical system of courts, with a Constitutional Court, separate Civil and Criminal Courts of Appeal and various inferior courts. Inferior courts are presided over by Magistrates with original jurisdiction in criminal and civil actions. In the criminal courts,

neg: Law of Canada the "Constitution Act, 1867", the federal Parliament and the provincial legislatures both have the constitutional authority to create courts: Parliament under s. 101, and the Provinces under s. 92(14). However, the federal power to create courts is much more limited than the provincial power. The provincial courts have a much more extensive jurisdiction, including the constitutionally entrenched power to determine constitutional issues. The Supreme Court of Canada () is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeal in the Canadian justice system. Parliament created it by Act of Parliament in 1875, as a "general court of

neg: Judicial review in the United States system of separation of powers. The framers stated that the courts' power to declare laws unconstitutional would provide a check on the legislature, protecting against excessive exercise of legislative power. Judicial review was discussed in at least seven of the thirteen state ratifying conventions, and was mentioned by almost two dozen delegates. In each of these conventions, delegates asserted that the proposed Constitution would allow the courts to exercise judicial review. There is no record of any delegate to a state ratifying convention who indicated that the federal courts would not have the power of judicial review. For example, James

neg: Court system of Canada common law, because the superior courts derive their authority from the Constitution, they can hear any matter unless there is a federal or provincial statute that says otherwise or that gives exclusive jurisdiction to some other court or tribunal. The doctrine of inherent jurisdiction gives superior courts greater freedom than statutory courts to be flexible and creative in the delivering of legal remedies and relief. The Supreme Court of Canada, the federal courts, the various appellate courts from the provinces and territories, and the numerous low-level provincial courts are statutory courts whose decision-making power is granted by either the federal

neg: Preamble to the United States Constitution are granted to it (e.g., the power to "establish Post Offices and Post Roads" includes the power to punish those who interfere with the postal system so established). The Court has recognized the federal government's supreme power over those limited matters entrusted to it. Thus, no state may interfere with the federal government's operations as though its sovereignty is superior to the federal government's (discussed more below); for example, states may not interfere with the federal government's near absolute discretion to sell its own real property, even when that real property is located in one or another state. The federal

neg: Government of Tasmania senior ministers, and informally called the Cabinet. In practice, executive power is exercised by the Premier of Tasmania and the Cabinet, who are appointed by the Governor, but who hold office by virtue of their ability to command the support of a majority of members of the House of Assembly. Judicial power is exercised by the Supreme Court of Tasmania and a system of subordinate courts, but the High Court of Australia and other federal courts have overriding jurisdiction on matters which fall under the ambit of the Australian Constitution. The current ministry of Tasmania is the Second Hodgman Ministry,

neg: King's Bench jurisdiction King's Bench jurisdiction King's Bench jurisdiction or King's Bench power is the extraordinary jurisdiction of an individual state's highest court over its inferior courts. In the United States, the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia, Florida, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma and Wisconsin use the term to describe the extraordinary jurisdiction of their highest court, called the Court of Appeals in New York or the Supreme Court in the other states, over the courts below it. King's Bench jurisdiction includes the power to vacate the judgments of inferior courts when acting in extraordinary circumstances, for example, where the importance of an issue

neg: State court (United States) "not" ratify the decisions made by some subordinate entity in its name. Although the United States Constitution and federal laws override state laws where there is a conflict between federal and state law, state courts are not subordinate to federal courts. Rather, as instruments of separate sovereigns (under the U.S. system of dual sovereignty), they are two parallel sets of courts with different but often overlapping jurisdiction. As the U.S. Supreme Court recognized in "Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins" (1938), no part of the federal Constitution actually grants federal courts the power to directly decide the content of state law.

neg: Northern Mariana Islands They are a commonwealth of the United States. Federal funds to the commonwealth are administered by the Office of Insular Affairs of the U.S. Department of the Interior. Replicating the separation of powers elsewhere in the United States, the executive branch is headed by the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands; legislative power is vested in the bicameral Northern Mariana Islands Commonwealth Legislature and the judicial power is vested in the CNMI Supreme Court and the trial courts inferior to it. Some critics, including the author of the political website "Saipan Sucks", say that politics in the Northern Mariana Islands

neg: New Amsterdam judicial system the WIC. The system of patroonships enabled Amsterdam investors to obtain large tracts of land on the condition that fifty families settled within those lands within four years. The patroons could establish and administer courts of justice (Patroon’s Courts). Appeal was possible to the director and the council of the WIC in New Amsterdam for fines higher than 50 guilders. The most famous and successful patroon was Kiliaen van Rensselaer who established Rensselaerwyck. The system of patroonships did not affect New Amsterdam, as the WIC retained control over Manhattan. By 1640 the WIC no longer was the only commercial power

neg: Politics of Pakistan Court as an apex court, alongside the high courts and other inferior courts. The judiciary's function is to interpret the Constitution and federal laws and regulations. Pakistan is a multiparty democracy where several political parties compete for seats in the National and Provincial assemblies. However, as an aftermath of the Fall of Dhaka in 1971, a two-party system was inculcated between the Peoples Party and Muslim League. There has also been a sharp rise in the popularity of centrist parties such that PML-Q and PTI. The Military establishment has played an influential role in the country's politics. From 1950s to

neg: Law of Australia had been established through Acts of the British Parliament. The "New South Wales Act" 1823 provided for the establishment of a Supreme Court with the power to deal with all criminal and civil matters "as fully and amply as Her Majesty's Court of King's Bench, Common Pleas and Exchequer at Westminster". Inferior courts were also established, including courts of General or Quarter Sessions, and Courts of Requests. Representative government emerged in the 1840s and 1850s, and a considerable measure of autonomy was given to local legislatures in the second half of the nineteenth century. Colonial Parliaments introduced certain reforms such

neg: Judiciary of Germany candidates start working at courts immediately. However, they are subjected to a probationary period of up to five years before being appointed as judges for life. The judicial system is established and governed by part IX of the "Grundgesetz für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland" (the Basic Law of the Federal Republic of Germany). Article 92 of the Basic Law establishes the courts, and that states that "the judicial power shall be vested in the judges; it shall be exercised by the Federal Constitutional Court, by the federal courts provided for in this Basic Law, and by the courts of the Länder."

neg: Senior Courts Act 1981 was renamed the Senior Courts Act 1981, and all statutory references to the Supreme Court of England and Wales were amended to refer to the Senior Courts of England and Wales. The former term "Supreme Court" did not mean the 2009 Supreme Court (which, of course, did not exist in 1981), but was shorthand for the "Supreme Court of Judicature", which comprised the "Superior Courts" (as opposed to the "Inferior Courts"). Although the old superior courts are now "senior courts", the inferior courts have not become "junior courts"! The following directions have been given pursuant to section 75(1) by the

neg: Judiciary of Germany on the other hand, have created a unique defender of the " since World War II and given it a valuable role in Germany's modern democracy. The federal courts are administered by the federal government, all the other courts belong to a state and are administered by it. The independence of the judiciary that is laid down in the federal constitution (article 97 para. 1) only refers to the judicial decision-making process of any individual judge, not to the judicial power as a whole. In line with this, the courts are administrative bodies subordinate to the respective department of justice,

neg: Judiciary of Australia in the various Australian courts, and ultimately determined by the High Court now that appeals to the (British) Judicial Committee of the Privy Council have been abolished. The High Court has described the concept of a superior court (and associated 'notions derived from the position of pre-Judicature common law courts') as having 'no ready application in Australia to federal courts.' Despite this, Australian courts are frequently characterised as either 'superior' or 'inferior.' The Federal Court and the Supreme Courts of each State and Territory are generally considered to be superior courts. There is no single definition of the term 'superior

neg: Court system of Canada has passed corresponding legislation granting the Federal Court jurisdiction over the dispute. Also the Federal Courts have the power to review decisions, orders, and other administrative actions of most federal boards, commissions, and tribunals. That means most federal government can be challenged in the federal court. Also with the Federal Court, the system may refer back to questions of law, jurisdiction,or price to one of the federal courts at any stage of proceeding. In the aftermath of 9/11, Parliament enacted a number of laws to protect national security. The Federal Court has exclusive jurisdiction to determine many issues which arise

neg: Islamic Courts Union the hardline Islamist groups concentrated their power in the south and west of Somalia, taking ground from both the TFG and ICU. By January 2009, a reconciliation and power-sharing deal was brokered between the Transitional Federal Government (TFG) and the Djibouti contingent from the former Islamic Courts Union which resulted in the expansion of the Parliament and the election of Sheik Sharif Ahmed, former leader of the ICU, as President of the Transitional Federal Government. After the collapse of the Somali government in 1991, a system of "sharia"-based Islamic courts became the main judicial system, funded through fees paid by

neg: DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Cuno taxpayer does not establish the standing required by Article III of the United States Constitution for a challenge to state tax laws to be heard in federal court. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed a separate concurring opinion. The Court stated that the power of federal courts to engage in judicial review was limited by the requirement that the case be an actual case or controversy under Article III. "If a dispute is not a proper case or controversy, the courts have no business deciding it, or expounding the law in the course of doing so." Despite the plaintiffs' previous position

neg: Montana inferior courts Montana inferior courts Inferior courts in Montana also known as courts of limited jurisdiction, refer to those courts of law, established by the Constitution of Montana or authorized by law, with limited jurisdictions. These courts consist of City Courts, Justice Courts, and Municipal Courts. Inferior courts may be courts of record (in that a transcript of all proceedings is made), or they may not. Appeals from inferior courts are made to Montana District Courts. Montana has had two constitutions in its history, both of which have authorized inferior courts. The constitution of 1889 explicitly authorized the creation of justice courts

neg: Precedent the United States, the Second Circuit (New York and surrounding states) is especially respected in commercial and securities law, the Seventh Circuit (in Chicago), especially Judge Posner, is highly regarded on antitrust, and the District of Columbia Circuit is highly regarded on administrative law, Generally, a common law court system has trial courts, intermediate appellate courts and a supreme court. The inferior courts conduct almost all trial proceedings. The inferior courts are bound to obey precedent established by the appellate court for their jurisdiction, and all supreme court precedent. The Supreme Court of California's explanation of this principle is that

neg: Montana District Courts arising from a reduction in the charge of felony, and misdemeanors found during trial in a District Court. District Courts also have the power to issue writs and naturalize citizens. District Courts have the power to enforce the decisions of the Montana Water Court arising within their judicial district. Except as otherwise provided for by law, District Courts act as appellate courts for inferior courts, and must hear cases "de novo". Justices of the Peace Courts are not "courts of record", which is why District Courts must try "the matter anew, the same as if it had not been heard

neg: Federalist No. 81 outlining exactly how the constitution would work while taking input and defending itself from criticism. Federalist No. 81 Outlines and explains how the various courts of the U.S will work in tandem to create to a system that ensures that laws are both fair and equal across the country. The Supreme Court and its relation to state legislatures is the main focus of this paper. Hamilton spends the majority of the piece defending and outlining the necessity of a supreme court in order to protect and preserve the rights of the citizens. Hamilton Wrote "The power of constituting inferior courts

neg: Government of Australia courts created by the Federal Parliament, including the Federal Court of Australia, the Family Court of Australia, and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Additionally, unlike in the United States, the federal legislature has the power to enact laws which vest federal jurisdiction in State courts. Since the Australian Constitution requires a separation of powers at the federal level, only courts may exercise federal judicial power; and conversely, non-judicial functions cannot be vested in courts. State judicial power is exercised by each State's Supreme Court, and such other courts and tribunals created by the State Parliaments. The High Court is

neg: Henry M. Hart Jr. on: 1) claims of entitlement to/ sufficiency of judicial process; and 2) claims that rights are violated and not vindicated. While this is not a right to any particular remedy, or any particular court, it is a right to some remedy, somewhere, even if that requires the federal courts to fall back on their general Constitutional grants of power, or for recourse by the individual to the state courts. Hart was a frequent collaborator with Herbert Wechsler, with whom he authored "Federal Courts and the Federal System," "the most influential casebook in Constitutional law" and also "the book most frequently

neg: Montana inferior courts incentives to encourage the individual to stay in treatment; and much more regular, much more frequent judicial oversight. Montana inferior courts Inferior courts in Montana also known as courts of limited jurisdiction, refer to those courts of law, established by the Constitution of Montana or authorized by law, with limited jurisdictions. These courts consist of City Courts, Justice Courts, and Municipal Courts. Inferior courts may be courts of record (in that a transcript of all proceedings is made), or they may not. Appeals from inferior courts are made to Montana District Courts. Montana has had two constitutions in its history,

neg: State supreme court made an egregious error in its finding of facts, the state supreme court will remand to the trial court for a new trial. This responsibility of correcting the errors of inferior courts is the origin of a number of the different names for supreme courts in various state court systems. The court consists of a panel of judges selected by methods outlined in the state constitution. State supreme courts are completely distinct from any United States federal courts located within the geographical boundaries of a state's territory, or the federal United States Supreme Court (although appeals, on some issues, from

neg: Complaint United States bankruptcy courts. The system is managed by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts; it allows lawyers and self-represented clients to obtain documents entered in the case much faster than regular mail. In addition to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, many of the U.S. district courts have developed their own requirements included in Local Rules for filing with the Court. Local Rules can set up a limit on the number of pages, establish deadlines for motions and responses, explain whether it is acceptable to combine a motion petition with a response, specify if a judge needs an

neg: Federal government of Nigeria Federal government of Nigeria The federal government of Nigeria is composed of three distinct branches: legislative, executive, and judicial, whose powers are vested by the Constitution of Nigeria in the National Assembly, the President, and the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, respectively. Nigeria is a federal republic, with executive power exercised by the president. The president is the head of state, the head of government, and the head of a multi-party system. Nigerian politics takes place within a framework of a federal, presidential, representative democratic republic, in which executive power is exercised by the government. Legislative power is held

neg: Canon law of the Catholic Church divine law or natural law, derive formal authority in the case of universal laws from promulgation by the supreme legislator—the Supreme Pontiff—who possesses the totality of legislative, executive, and judicial power in his person, while particular laws derive formal authority from promulgation by a legislator inferior to the supreme legislator, whether an ordinary or a delegated legislator. The actual subject material of the canons is not just doctrinal or moral in nature, but all-encompassing of the human condition. It has all the ordinary elements of a mature legal system: laws, courts, lawyers, judges, a fully articulated legal code for the

neg: Religious law authority in the case of universal laws from promulgation by the supreme legislator—the Supreme Pontiff—who possesses the totality of legislative, executive, and judicial power in his person, while particular laws derive formal authority from promulgation by a legislator inferior to the supreme legislator, whether an ordinary or a delegated legislator. The actual subject material of the canons is not just doctrinal or moral in nature, but all-encompassing of the human condition. It has all the ordinary elements of a mature legal system: laws, courts, lawyers, judges, a fully articulated legal code for the Latin Church as well as a code

neg: Judicial appointments in Canada Judicial appointments in Canada Judicial appointments in Canada are made by the federal government or provincial government. Superior and federal court judges are appointed by federal government, while inferior courts are appointed by the provincial government. There are two levels of courts in each province or territory (except Nunavut): superior (upper level) courts appointed by the federal government, and a provincial or territorial court appointed by the province or territory. Candidates for these courts are screened by a judicial advisory committee established for each province or territory. Several provinces have created arm's length committees that make a short list of

neg: Law enforcement in Germany in the city of Karlsruhe) is the German supreme court responsible for constitutional matters, with power of judicial review. Germany's supreme court system, called "Oberste Gerichtshöfe des Bundes" ("Supreme Federal Courts of Justice"), is specialised: for civil and criminal cases, the highest court of appeal is the inquisitorial Federal Court of Justice ("Bundesgerichtshof" in Karlsruhe) and for other affairs the courts are the Federal Labour Court ("Bundesarbeitsgericht" in Erfurt), the Federal Social Court ("Bundessozialgericht" in Kassel), the Federal Finance Court ("Bundesfinanzhof" in Munich) and the Federal Administrative Court ("Bundesverwaltungsgericht" in Leipzig). The "Völkerstrafgesetzbuch" (International Penal Law Code) regulates the consequences

neg: Roger B. Taney "whether a state passes a quarantine law, or a law to punish offenses, or to establish courts of justice ... in every case it exercises the same power; that is to say, the power of sovereignty, the power to govern men and things within the limits of its dominion." This broad conception of state power helped to provide a constitutional justification for state governments to take on new responsibilities, such as the construction of internal improvements and the establishment of public schools. Taney's 1849 majority opinion in "Luther v. Borden" provided an important rationale for limiting federal judicial power. The

neg: Spanish Courts for Violence against Women establish any legal measures necessary to protect the victims. In the Civil jurisdiction, and as long the process is due to the initiation of a criminal process in this courts, the courts have the power to know in the business related to family law Staff associated with this Court are given special training in relation to gender violence due to the trauma suffered by victims, and the existence of emotional links with the offender. Additionally, the Courts are usually assisted by psychologists and social assistants. The creation of this court, founded and strongly supported by Women's institutions, has generated quite

neg: Separation of powers in Australia The federal separation of powers also has implications for State courts, due to the fact that State courts may be invested with federal judicial power under section 71 of the "Commonwealth Constitution". On this basis it was held in "Kable v Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW)" that a State court could not be given a function inconsistent with its status as a potential repository of federal judicial power. The doctrine was rarely applied in the early years following Kable, leading Justice Kirby to describe it as "a constitutional guard-dog that would bark but once." However, there has been a revival

neg: Canonical institution It is the "missio canonica" indispensable for the validity of acts requiring an actual power of jurisdiction. This institution, which is reserved to the bishop or his vicar-general and to those possessing a quasi-episcopal jurisdiction, is required when the "institutio tituli collativa" belongs to an inferior prelate, a chapter, or a monastery. The "institutio tituli" collativa given by the bishop himself implies the "institutio auctorisabilis", which, therefore, needs not to be given by a special act. Canonical institution Canonical institution (from the Latin "institutio", from "instituere", to establish) is a technical term of the canon law of the Roman Catholic

neg: Appellate jurisdiction of the United States Constitution, the judicial power of the United States is vested in the Supreme Court of the United States and the inferior courts established by law. The Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure govern appellate proceedings. Under its standard of review, an appellate court decides the extent of the deference it would give to the lower court's decision, based on whether the appeal was one of fact or one of law. In reviewing an issue of fact, an appellate court ordinarily gives deference to the trial court's findings. It is the duty of trial judges or juries to

neg: Superior court as labour boards, human rights tribunals and licensing authorities. The superior courts of appeal hear appeals from the superior courts of original jurisdiction, as well as from the inferior courts and administrative tribunals. The jurisdiction of the superior courts of appeal are entirely statutory. The details of their jurisdiction will vary depending on the laws passed by the federal government and the particular province or territory. All judges of the provincial superior courts are appointed by the federal government under the authority of the "Constitution Act, 1867", while judges of the territorial superior courts are appointed under the authority of

neg: Court dress under the gown, though QCs and judges have more elaborate cuffs than other lawyers. Barristers are required to gown for the Courts of Appeal and Superior-level courts of the provinces and territories, unless appearing on applications in chambers, in Small Claims Court or before Masters. The Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada at the general procedure level require barristers to gown. As well, gowns are required at the Federal Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada. The donning of business attire is acceptable by barristers appearing in chambers and in inferior (puisne) provincial and territorial courts;