From: ahk@chinet.com   
      
   Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
   >On 11-May-14 08:47, Adam H. Kerman wrote:   
   >>Stephen Sprunk  wrote:   
      
   >>>Federal courts/law are superior to state courts/law; however, federal   
   >>>courts only have original jurisdiction in specific matters.  Cases   
   >>>usually get into federal courts via appeal from state courts.   
      
   >>Wrong again, Stephen; that's not how federalism works. State law and federal   
   >>law are parallel systems, not inferior/superior.   
      
   >The US Constitution, and the US Civil War, disagree with you; federal   
   >law/courts are superior to state law/courts.   
      
   There can be overlapping jurisdiction of the two systems. But there is no   
   shortage of incidents in which state courts have sole jurisdiction over   
   the issue at trial, with no appeal in federal court. If federal law was   
   always superior to state law as you claim, then any state matter would   
   be appealable to federal court in all circumstances.   
      
   >>In order to get a matter heard in state court into federal court, there   
   >>has to be a federal matter for the federal courts to adjudicate.   
      
   >Thanks to "incorporation" via the 14th Amd, you can appeal pretty much   
   >any non-trivial case into the federal courts.   
      
   That's crap.   
      
   >Even before that, diversity was an easy way to get into the federal   
   >courts on original jurisdiction.   
      
   Nothing to do with your claim.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)