Final answer:
True, state courts can use long-arm statutes to assert jurisdiction over nonresident defendants with sufficient ties to the state. While federal courts have jurisdiction over cases involving federal law and other specific matters, state courts are typically the primary venue for most legal disputes.
Step-by-step explanation:
True, under a state long-arm statute, a court can exercise jurisdiction over certain nonresident defendants. This legal provision allows state courts to reach beyond their borders in cases where a nonresident defendant has sufficient connections to the state such as committing a tort, conducting business, or entering into a contract within the state. It is one way that state courts maintain their comprehensive role as the core of the U.S. judicial system, handling most criminal and civil matters.
However, cases may also be heard by federal courts based on the nature of the law or parties involved. For instance, federal courts have the jurisdiction to decide cases involving federal law, interstate disputes, and diversity of citizenship, where the parties are from different states or nations, and the amount in dispute exceeds $75,000. A case involving a federal question could move from state to federal courts, and the U.S. Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in specific cases involving high officials or states as parties.