The American common law system contains a complex array of federal, state and local courts with exclusive and overlapping jurisdictional powers. Each state has a separate, comprehensive judiciary organized in a trial and appellate court hierarchy that parallels the structure of the federal courts.

In the process of interpreting and applying the law’s generalities to decide specific cases, judges exercise a major responsibility for shaping public policies. Common-law jurisprudence enables judges to create law. The breadth of this power is demonstrated by the different constitutional approaches, especially in matters of individual rights and federalism, of the Supreme Court under Earl Warren, in a period of progressive judicial activism, and under William Rehnquist. State judges influence society equally for example, by expanding legal theories of tort and products liability to encompass the heath risks of tobacco.

Administrative duties also emphasize judicial autonomy Renowned federal judges and chief judges of the states’ highest courts are powerful voices for court reform. The Supreme Court, subject to congressional approval, prescribes rules for procedures and practice for the federal courts, generating changes followed by many state courts. The ethical conduct and performance of judges is highly self-regulating; questions are resolved by judicial panels. Public confidence in the soundness of the rule of law is strengthened by political separation and independence of the judiciary from other government branches. Judicial insulation from short-term political repercussions tempts politically vulnerable executive and legislative bodies to leave resolution of compelling and contentious cases to receptive judges.

The litigious nature of American society pressures the judiciary. In the past twenty years, despite the growth of alternative forms of dispute resolution, federal cases have increased by 60 percent, and approximately 100 million state court cases are filed each year. This crowds dockets, delays trials, fosters rudeness and escalates controversies involving the election and appointment of judges.

Federal judges are nominated by the president and confirmed by a majority of the Senate. Supreme Court choices can have the most lasting impact of any presidential action: appointments are made for life and justices have served for over thirty years. State and local judges are elected or appointed. Election campaigns for the highest courts in large states require millions of dollars, exposing winners to accusations that their rulings are influenced by the large campaign contributions of lawyers, powerful law firms and business groups. State judicial appointments are usually made by elected officials on a partisan basis, constrained somewhat by the recommendations of local bar associations that evaluate aspirants’ qualifications.

Most of the public gleans its knowledge and understanding of the judiciary from trials regularly televised on cable stations and though extensive mass-media coverage of celebrity cases. Popular “judge” shows, with mock trials of consenting parties, also shape perceptions. Still, the judiciary especially the Supreme Court, remains America’s most highly respected and trusted profession.