AHC: Alternate American (U.S.) State and Federal judiciaries

After this thread about alternate State Governments in the U.S., I wanted to know what if, and how, alternate judiciaries were envisaged in the U.S., whether in a Federal or State level.

For exemple, specialized divisions inside Supreme Courts (civil, administrative or criminal; see the French Cour de Cassation), split Courts (see Texas and Oklahoma) or Upper Houses as Supreme Courts (see the pre-2009 House of Lords)

Upper houses as courts are not possible, except for impeachment, due to separation of powers doctrine. Beyond that, there is some level of flexibility given that the only portion of the judiciary established in the federal constitution is the Supreme Court.

Wendell said:

Upper houses as courts are not possible, except for impeachment, due to separation of powers doctrine. Beyond that, there is some level of flexibility given that the only portion of the judiciary established in the federal constitution is the Supreme Court.

Click to expand...

Making an Upper House the Supreme Court or dividing the SCOTUS in panel might be unconstitutional but State Supreme Courts might be divided in several panels, depending on the State Constitution.

And, moreover, assigning judges to specialized courts (civil, criminal, administrative, military, etc.) could be legit from both the State and Federal Constitutions.

Johannes Parisiensis said:

Making an Upper House the Supreme Court or dividing the SCOTUS in panel might be unconstitutional but State Supreme Courts might be divided in several panels, depending on the State Constitution.

And, moreover, assigning judges to specialized courts (civil, criminal, administrative, military, etc.) could be legit from both the State and Federal Constitutions.

Click to expand...

Well, a state military court is not likely, but sure.

Wendell said:

Upper houses as courts are not possible, except for impeachment, due to separation of powers doctrine. Beyond that, there is some level of flexibility given that the only portion of the judiciary established in the federal constitution is the Supreme Court.

Click to expand...

Errr... that technically only applies to the Federal government, I believe. The states are only bound by a requirement to be 'republican', not even democratic, let alone have to follow separation of powers.

Dathi THorfinnsson said:

Errr... that technically only applies to the Federal government, I believe. The states are only bound by a requirement to be 'republican', not even democratic, let alone have to follow separation of powers.

Click to expand...

It is not unreasonably argued that "republican" governance, as the U.S. Constitution stipulates, is a requirement upon the states to have a judiciary that is independent of the legislature.

Wendell said:

It is not unreasonably argued that "republican" governance, as the U.S. Constitution stipulates, is a requirement upon the states to have a judiciary that is independent of the legislature.

Click to expand...

At least in OTL, the Supreme Court has held that the meaning of "republican government" is a political question for the states and Congress to decide, and has, for instance, upheld lawmaking by referendum against a Guarantee Clause challenge. If a state wanted to make part of its legislature into a high court, and Congress was OK with it, it would happen - and Congress probably would be OK with it, given the political norms of the time and the fact that the alternative would be a constitutional crisis.

I'd add that there's some precedent for this in the colonial United States: the legislatures of Massachusetts and New Hampshire are both called the General Court, and at least the Massachusetts one heard judicial appeals until 1780. And at the local level, Ohio still has mayor's courts.