American Judicial System: An Overview
The establishment of federal judicial administrative structures in the twentieth century changed the federal judiciary from a collection of courts into a judicial branch. These structures provide judges with some power over administrative decisions that can affect not only how they do their jobs but also how freely they do their jobs. Even though Congress applies omissions of the federal courts, decides how much money is required to operate the judicial branch, and can alter judicial branch structure and procedures, those authorities are part of the accountability necessary in representative government. Judges are no longer at the will of the executive branch for the distribution of resources, nevertheless, and they deal with Congress directly, rather than through the chief appellant in the federal courts, the Department of Justice.
The federal judicial administrative system is however, not without its critics, including some who think it mainly serves judicial self-interest. Others disputes that the administrative apparatus is too burdensome, due to its representative nature, or otherwise, not representative enough of the varied interests of a federal judiciary spread across the nation. In the face of these occasional criticism, yet, one senses little interest, within or without the federal judiciary, for major changes.
Strangely, the Constitution says nothing about the one job the Supreme Court is most known for at present. That is the power to review federal and state laws to resolve whether or not they are constitutional. Some scholars have said that the framers believed that the Supreme Court would have this power without having to imply it in the Constitution. They quote, for example, Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist Papers, a series of articles published to support the ratification of the Constitution. He wrote:
‘The interpretation of the laws is the right and peculiar domain.....
