Final answer:
The TRUE statement about the differences between constitutional courts and special courts is that constitutional courts are established under Article III of the Constitution and decide on a broad range of federal and constitutional issues, while special courts are established for specific purposes by Congress and focus on specialized matters without generally addressing broad constitutional issues.
Step-by-step explanation:
The key difference between constitutional courts and special courts lies in their jurisdiction and the types of cases they are authorized to hear. Constitutional courts, which include the U.S. Supreme Court and the lower federal courts created by Congress, such as the U.S. District Courts and the U.S. Court of Appeals, are established under Article III of the Constitution to interpret and apply federal laws, including the Constitution itself. They handle a broad range of cases involving federal law and constitutional issues. On the other hand, special courts, also known as Article I or legislative courts, are established by Congress for specific purposes and handle a more limited range of matters, such as bankruptcy, tax, and military cases.
These courts are fundamentally different in that constitutional courts have the power to rule on the constitutionality of laws and government actions and tend to protect individual's rights, such as the case where the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Samantha Elauf, whose First Amendment rights were upheld against Abercrombie & Fitch's dress code policy. Special courts, however, have a more specialized focus and do not generally address broad constitutional issues, instead dealing with the specific areas of law that Congress has designated them to oversee.
Moreover, members of constitutional courts often have lifetime tenure to promote independence and impartiality, while judges on special courts may serve for fixed terms or at the pleasure of Congress. This independence allows constitutional courts to sometimes make decisions that are unexpected by the presidents who nominated the judges, reflecting the courts' abilities to evolve and adapt over time, ensuring the protection of individual rights and the stability of the legal system.