comparison of Brazil and the U.S judicial system
Both Brazil and the U.S. have judicial system have courts of limited jurisdiction or the lower courts. These courts encompass minor disputes over the issues such as traffic offence, family issues, and other petty criminal activities. Most of the decisions handled by the limited jurisdiction are a new trial, commonly known as ‘trial de novo’ in the law industry, and any dispute arising from them can be referred to courts of general jurisdiction.
Although the lower courts in the United States have most of their structure the same, there are fundamental differences which separate them. For instance, in Brazil, the two lower courts; federal courts and state courts which are both enshrined in the Federal constitution and mandated to their core objective which is similar to the U.S. one. Constitution forms the basis in which the courts originate. The federal courts possess jurisdiction over the matters which has been outlined in article 108 and 109. These two article outline matters pertaining to government agencies. The state courts are mandated to listen to all cases which are not falling within the jurisdiction of any other courts, i.e. military, federal electoral, or labour courts. It is worth to note that civil procedure and the second-lower lower courts are embodied by either the state appellate court in the state stage or the regional federal courts at the Federal scene. Unlike in Brazil, in the U.S., the lower court has one segment known as the district courts and spread across the country.
To check the excesses of these two limited jurisdictions, in Brazil, there is a Superior Court of Justice and also the Federal Supreme Court. The two courts are given a mandate by the constitution to listen and decide cases which have already been determined by lower courts but appealed. Thus, the Brazilian Judicial system has the two appellate court to maintain uniform interpretation of the federal law. On the contrary, the U.S. poses the circuit courts, Supreme Courts, and the Federal system courts, which is the last level of appeal.
On the other hand, in the U.S., the courts of limited jurisdiction are commonly known as district courts or the trial courts. Cases in these courts are heard for the first time, and they can be appealed to the high court once the ruling has been made. Thus both the U.S. and the Brazilian courts of limited courts handle brand new cases, and they don’t possess the appellate power. Cases which they have handled can be overturned by the higher court if the appellant successfully proves mishandling of the provision of the law when the judgment was made.
Unlike the higher courts in both countries which have greater visibility owing to their handling of high-profile cases, the courts of limited jurisdiction are remotely located. They have no much presence in the society in which they operate. Their arguments are minor and thus less likely to bring media and public attention. This fact has also contributed to low visibility for funding, leaving the court to operate with an overstretched budget.
The differences between the courts of limited jurisdiction in both countries are that in U.S. such courts are given a paramount role within the judicial system. Studies show that in the U.S., the districts courts handle more than 60% of all the cases in their initial stages while in Brazil, these figures are below 50%. The United States lower courts have an elaborate platform to showcase their performance, i.e. excellence and innovations, while promoting their role within the society. This is not the case in Brazil, in which the lower courts are less funded and does not play a significant role within the community as expected.