Unlike the other lower courts, the US Supreme Court is the only one that decides on the cases to hear. Even though 9,000 new lawsuits are filed annually in this court, only 90 are heard by the court. Other than the 90 cases that get a plenary review, the Supreme Court also decides about 100 cases. Moreover, the court also receives over 1,200 applications from various judicial opinion annually. Each of the fifty states in the United States has their supreme courts that act as a higher authority in cases pertaining to laws.

Nonetheless, not all states consider these courts as the highest. For instance, New York considers its highest court as New York Courts for Appeal. By far, an appeal to the decision made by courts is the most common way cases reach the Supreme Court. Even though it is rare for Supreme courts to hear case appeals by the state ruling, it mostly hears cases involving application as well as interpretation of US constitution. The courts of appeal will decide whether the state trial was applied correctly or not by the state court.  This court will only consider those cases which four out of nine justices vote to grant an appeal from the state courts — it all about the certiorari. The parties willing to petition the court’s decision must file a petition for writ of certiorari. Entities or people who wish to appeal their cases with the Supreme Court must have four justices vote in their favor to be granted certiorari. If otherwise, the petition will be denied and the case will not go to the Court. Consequently, the decision from the lower court stands. Furthermore, the court only decides to hear those cases that are deemed important.

Specialized drug courts dockets are those that offer alternative sentencing coupled with treatment for individuals with serious substance abuse problems as well as mental disorders. These problem-solving courts take a public health consideration where the judicial system, the law enforcers, social workers, health workers and the community as a whole to assist the addicted offenders into long-term recovery. Offenders are subjected to mandatory drug tests, treatments, and educational training well as counseling completed with probation.  This approach is a good idea. Reason being, in the history of US, drug courts is touted as one of the single intervention strategies for individuals struggling with severe addiction. It connects offenders to treatment and assists them to stay long enough to be successful. They help these people hold on to their jobs, pay taxes and receive treatment that would be otherwise impossible in prison. Punishing people does not always solve the addiction problem. When released from prison, 75% of them return to drugs. The punitive approach has not only economic but also adverse societal consequences with over 1.6 million drug addicts behind the bar and roughly $80 million annual spent on the correctional facilities. Therefore, every dollar spent on the drug courts yields the criminal justice a saving of three dollars.  Lastly, these drug programs help offender reintegrate into the community smoothly with less difficulty.

These drug courts are incredibly successful in this state and it a promising alternative. First, the crime rate have reduced significantly. Drug addicts have a higher percentage of committing crimes than sober people. Approximately, 77% of crimes and 78% of public offenses in this state are related to drug abuse. This cost this state more than %10 million annually. This is inclusive of parole services, prison, probation, court as well as police. The drug-related arrest is financially burdensome to the state.  These courts reduce recidivism among offenders since it solves the cause of crime. Also, these offenders have a lower likelihood of being arrested. Additionally, it is also cost effective since it saves taxpayers an average of $2000 per offender that would have been spent if they went to the correctional facility.

Drug courts concentrate more on treatment approaches, but the issue of cost is an issue. This is because of their high treatment expenses as well as evaluation. Even though it is costly, there is no getting around that this method is useful in relation to the amount of money saved per a number of offenders treated. It has been effective in reducing recidivism, crime, and jail crowding as compared to other conventional approaches. Consequently, effectiveness should be the most important. This is because it saves the country financially in the long run. Nevertheless, the right balance between cost and efficiency is significant for positive outcomes. This is because tough economic times is a major setback to this treatment court system.

These strategic initiatives include consolidation of services done in the back-office by merging different departments. Furthermore, the courts can reduce the number of court sessions, drug tests and treatments especially during the last phases of treatment.  The drug courts can also partner with other agencies to create a new stream of revenue other than just depending on the taxpayer money. Advanced technology has not only eaten how things are done, but it has also helped in reducing cost in many processes. As such technology should be incorporated into the treatment process to reduce the expenses associated with the diagnostic and treatment process. The court could lose as well as leverage on the community who have a powerful influence on positivity among the offenders. This helps in generating local support hence effectiveness

 
Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?