Multiple sovereigns doctrine

Definition

The multiple sovereigns doctrine is a legal principle that allows for a defendant to be prosecuted by different jurisdictions for the same conduct without violating the double jeopardy clause. This means that if a crime violates both state and federal laws, a person can be tried in both courts without it being considered double jeopardy. This doctrine underscores the idea that different sovereigns—like state and federal governments—have their own legal systems and can impose separate penalties for the same act.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. The multiple sovereigns doctrine originated from the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Abbate v. United States in 1959, which upheld separate prosecutions by state and federal authorities.
2. This doctrine allows individuals to face different charges from both state and federal levels for the same incident, as each government can claim its own interests.
3. The application of this doctrine ensures that dual sovereignty does not violate an individual's rights under the Fifth Amendment concerning double jeopardy.
4. There are significant implications for defendants under this doctrine, as they may face harsher penalties due to multiple prosecutions.
5. The multiple sovereigns doctrine has been subject to criticism, with some arguing that it undermines the spirit of double jeopardy protections.

Review Questions

• How does the multiple sovereigns doctrine relate to the principle of double jeopardy?
  • The multiple sovereigns doctrine directly interacts with the double jeopardy principle by allowing individuals to be tried by different jurisdictions for the same conduct. While double jeopardy prevents an individual from being tried twice for the same offense within a single jurisdiction, the multiple sovereigns doctrine recognizes that state and federal governments are separate entities. This means that actions can violate both state and federal laws, leading to separate trials without constitutional violations.
• Discuss the implications of the multiple sovereigns doctrine on a defendant's rights and potential penalties.
  • The implications of the multiple sovereigns doctrine on a defendant's rights include facing multiple prosecutions that could lead to increased penalties. Since both state and federal authorities can pursue charges independently, a defendant might be convicted in one jurisdiction and still face charges in another. This raises concerns about fairness and the potential for excessive punishment, as individuals might experience compounded consequences for what appears to be a singular act.
• Evaluate how federalism supports the existence of the multiple sovereigns doctrine in the American legal system.
  • Federalism plays a crucial role in supporting the existence of the multiple sovereigns doctrine by establishing a legal framework where both state and federal governments have distinct powers and responsibilities. This division allows for different jurisdictions to enact their own laws and prosecute crimes based on their legal systems. The doctrine is thus a reflection of this federal structure, as it recognizes that each level of government has an interest in enforcing its laws, enabling multiple prosecutions without infringing upon an individual’s constitutional protections against double jeopardy.

Related terms

Double Jeopardy: A legal principle that prohibits an individual from being tried twice for the same offense in the same jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction: The authority of a court or government to make legal decisions and judgments over certain areas or types of cases.

Federalism: A system of government where power is divided between a central authority and smaller political units, such as states.