The United States and most Commonwealth countries are heirs to the common law legal tradition ofEnglish law; for example, U.S. courts have inherited the principle of stare decisis. A small number of important British statutes in effect at the time of the Revolution have been independently enacted in nearly identical form by U.S. states. Two examples that many lawyers will recognize are the Statute of Frauds and the Statute of 13 Elizabeth. Such English statutes are still regularly cited in contemporary legal writings about their modern American descendants.
Although the courts of the various Commonwealth nations are often influenced by each other's rulings, American courts rarely follow post-Revolution Commonwealth rulings unless there is no American ruling on point, the facts and law at issue are nearly identical, and the reasoning is strongly persuasive. The earliest American cases, even after the Revolution, often did cite contemporary British cases, but such citations gradually disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the legal problems of the American people.[1] Today, the vast majority of American legal citations are to domestic cases. Sometimes, courts, and casebook editors, do make exceptions for opinions on issues of first impression by brilliant British jurists, like William Blackstone or Lord Denning.
Some adherents of originalism and strict constructionism such as Justice Antonin Scalia of the United States Supreme Court argue that American courts should never look for guidance to post-Revolution cases from legal systems outside of the United States, regardless of whether the reasoning is persuasive, with the sole exception of cases interpreting international treaties to which the United States is a signatory. This position follows inevitably from the philosophy of originalism, which posits not only that the Constitution is the ultimate source of judicial authority in the U.S., but that the only proper analysis of the document consists of discerning the document's original meaning at the time of its adoption. Therefore, discussion of British law that post-dated the Constitution is irrelevant as it sheds no light on the original meaning of the Constitution. Others, such as Justices Anthony Kennedyand Stephen Breyer, disagree, and cite foreign law from time to time, where they believe it is informative, persuasive, useful or helpful. However, foreign law has never been cited as binding precedent, but merely as a reflection of the values of larger Anglo-American civilization. (See Lawrence v. Texas--one U.K. court decision, Dudgeon v. United Kingdom, was cited by the Supreme Court majority as being informative of the shared values of Anglo-American civilization.)
Federal law
Federal law in the United States originates with the Constitution, which gives Congress the power to enact statutes for certain limited purposes like regulating commerce. Nearly all statutes have been codified in the United States Code. Many statutes give executive branch agencies the power to createregulations, which are published in the Federal Register and codified into the Code of Federal Regulations. Regulations generally also carry the force of law under the Chevron doctrine. Many lawsuits turn on the meaning of a federal statute or regulation, and judicial interpretations of such meaning carry legal force under the principle of stare decisis.
State law
Volumes of the Thomson West annotated version of the California Penal Code, the codification of criminal law in the state ofCalifornia
The fifty American states are separate sovereignswith their own state constitutions and state governments. They retain plenary power to make laws covering anything not preempted by the federal Constitution, federal statutes, or international treaties ratified by the federal Senate.
Nearly all states started with the same British common law base, with the notable exception of Louisiana; Louisiana law has always been strongly influenced by the French Napoleonic Code. The passage of time has resulted in enormous diversity in the laws of the states. State courts have expanded the old common law rules in different directions (through their traditional power to make law under the doctrine of stare decisis), and state legislatures have passed various statutes expanding or overriding many judge-made laws.
Unlike other common law jurisdictions, all American states have codified some or all of their statutory law into legal codes. Codification was an idea borrowed from the civil law through the efforts of American lawyer David Dudley Field. New York's codes are known as "Laws." California and Texas simply call them "Codes." Most other states use terms such as "Revised Statutes" or "Compiled Statutes" for their codes. California, New York, and Texas have separate subject-specific codes, while all other states and the federal government use a single code divided into numbered titles.
In some states, codification is often treated as a mere restatement of the common law. Judges are free to liberally interpret the codes unless and until their interpretations are specifically overridden by the legislature.[2] In other states, there is a tradition of strict adherence to the plain text of the codes.
The advantage of codification is that once the state legislature becomes accustomed to writing new laws as amendments to an existing code, the code will usually reflect democratic sentiment as to what the current law is (though the entire state of the law must always be ascertained by reviewing case law to determine how judges have interpreted a particular codified statute).
In contrast, in jurisdictions with uncodified statutes, like the United Kingdom, determining what the law is can be a more difficult process. One has to trace back to the earliest relevant Act of Parliament, and then identify all later Acts which amended the earlier Act, or which directly overrode it. For example, when the UK decided to create a Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, lawmakers had to identify every single Act referring to the House of Lords that was still good law, and then amend all of those laws to refer to the Supreme Court.[3]
Criminal law
In the arena of criminal law, all states have somewhat similar laws in regard to "higher crimes" (orfelonies), such as murder and rape, although penalties for these crimes may vary from state to state.
For public welfare offenses where the state is punishing merely risky (as opposed to injurious) behavior, there is significant diversity across the various states. For example, punishments for drunk driving varied greatly prior to 1990. State laws dealing with drug crimes still vary widely, with some states treating possession of small amounts of drugs as a misdemeanor offense or as a medical issue and others categorizing the same offense as a serious felony.
Tort law
United States tort law varies widely across the states. For example, a few jurisdictions allow actions for negligent infliction of emotional distress even in the absence of physical injury to the plaintiff, but most do not. For any particular tort, states differ on the causes of action, types and scope of remedies, statutes of limitations, and the amount of specificity with which one must plead the cause. With practically any aspect of tort law, there is a "majority rule" adhered to by most states, and one or more "minority rules."
