What are the requirements for the Supreme Court to review decisions from state courts?

The requirement for the Supreme Court to review decisions from state courts emphasizes that the case must involve a final judgment from the highest state court within the relevant jurisdiction. This final judgment ensures that all state court remedies have been exhausted and that the issue is ripe for review by the Supreme Court.

The reasoning behind this requirement is rooted in the principles of federalism and the respect for state court systems. The Supreme Court does not review decisions from intermediate appellate courts unless there is a subsequent appeal to the state's highest court. Therefore, it must be a definitive resolution on the matter from the state's judicial system before it can be considered for Supreme Court review.

The other choices reference issues that, while relevant in other contexts of legal proceedings, do not accurately reflect the specific criteria for Supreme Court review. For instance, not every case must arise from a federal law issue; it can also involve state law matters if they raise significant federal questions. The Supreme Court does not require the state to agree to its review, as its discretion allows it to grant certiorari based on its own criteria. Lastly, there is no requirement for a majority ruling from lower courts to be presented, as the Supreme Court often reviews cases that have unique or substantial implications, regardless of lower court divisions.