Final answer:
The U.S. Supreme Court has final authority on federal law and constitutional issues, with both original and appellate jurisdiction, and selects cases at its discretion. In contrast, state supreme courts have final say on state law, limited jurisdiction, and sometimes mandatory case review.
Step-by-step explanation:
The primary distinction between the U.S. Supreme Court and a state supreme court lies in their authority and scope of jurisdiction. The U.S. Supreme Court is the final arbiter of federal law and constitutional issues, meaning its rulings are final and cannot be overturned by any other court. This distinction gives the U.S. Supreme Court a unique position within the American judicial system, often involving cases that have national significance or require interpretation of federal law. In contrast, state supreme courts generally have the final say on matters of state law, but their decisions can be reviewed by the U.S. Supreme Court if federal issues are involved.
When it comes to jurisdiction, the U.S. Supreme Court has both original and appellate jurisdiction. It has original jurisdiction in cases involving different states or foreign diplomats, but most often acts as an appellate court, reviewing decisions from federal appellate courts and state supreme courts. State supreme courts, however, have limited jurisdiction compared to the U.S. Supreme Court and may only hear cases as prescribed by state law.
Another key difference is the selection of cases for review. Unlike the U.S. Supreme Court, which has discretionary power to choose which cases it will hear through writs of certiorari, state supreme courts may have mandatory jurisdiction in certain types of appeals, meaning they must hear those cases.