Scott Graves
Gregory Hurley
In accordance with the U.S. Constitution, a majority of governmental functions upon which citizens depend are the responsibility of the state, rather than the federal, government. State court systems collectively handle many times the volume of cases handled within the federal court system, and while relations between the two spheres of are generally smooth, issues such as the federal statutory preemption of state and local authority continues to exist.
Links to related online resources are listed below. Non-digitized publications may be borrowed from the NCSC Library; call numbers are provided.
The purpose of this research is to evaluate the impact of the PLRA and the AEDPA. The goal was to determine the extent to which AEDPA and the PLRA have affected the number of habeas corpus petitions and prisoner lawsuits filed, respectively.
This report explains court interpreting services in state and federal courts by examining the Consortium, whose purpose is to find qualified interpreters through rigorous testing.
This report focuses on habeas corpus petitions in state courts, regarding the debate of creating a national policy for all such petitions. The authors provide examples and background information regarding habeas corpus policies in several states, present arguments, and then provide recommendations for answering the question of creating a national policy.
Report presents findings about possible ways to reduce state/federal tensions resulting from habeas corpus petitions.
This manual promotes cooperation between state and federal courts. It contains examples of practical steps state and federal judges and courts can take to save resources through sharing, to avoid scheduling or other conflicts that adversely affect court operations and the bar, and plan programs and other services that benefit both judiciaries.