Supremacy of Federal law

Supremacy of Federal law

The first text that served as the U.S. Constitution was not suitable: the Articles of Confederation did not allow for decisions to be made that could be applied across the board and permit things to be standardized. So the U.S. Constitution was drafted within a broad consensus. Article IV granted a major power to the Federal government. The Constitution gave Congress the power to pass Federal laws, called statutes. They are compiled in the United States Code. The power to interpret these laws fell to the judges, but that had not been specified in the beginning. This power derives from one of thegroundbreaking Supreme Court rulings in the Marbury v. Madison case, in 1803.

Common Law

When there is not a law that specifically applies to an issue raised, the judges turn to Common Law and look at the precedents. Williamthe Conqueror introduced the Common Law system in England in 1066. It is still in effect today in most of the Anglophone countries, including the United States, except for Louisiana. Common Law is very widely used in certain sectors of law, such as Property Law, Contract Law, or civil liability. It has changed over time and adapted to the evolution ofsociety,contrarytothelaws passed by the Assemblies, which take much longer to change. The system, though, is also more complex, which requires a high level of expertise.

Judicial precedent

Judges offer solutions based on their interpretation of the Law. This interpretation falls into the broader context of verdicts rendered by other Courts in similar cases. They are bound by these other judgments, and this is referred to as stare decisis, or the rule of the precedent. Some Courts may interpret laws differently from what might have been done elsewhere. In this case, the Supreme Court is the final judge and its role very often consists in arbitrating. Little by little, it reduces these differences in interpretation between the Courts.

Equity

Everybody hopes that his or her case will be fair. For this to happen, the American Courts have the option of choosing between two systems: Common Law and Equity. Common Law is limited in the sense that it only permits presenting monetary solutions, a compensation for the damage that was caused. Equity is a system that allows a judge to impose, for example, and obligation to do something, such as resorting to a sub- contractor, otherwise nothing else can be done. In such cases, receiving money in payment for damages serves no purpose for the entrepreneur, who would prefer a long-term solution that would allow them to function normally. There is no specialized Court for Equity. All judges may choose one or the other.

...