Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California

Re: Supreme court Subpoena

The Supreme Court has no need to issue subpoenas, because it is usually an appellate court. It decides cases on the basis of facts presented to a trial court, and does not itself hear testimony. (The purpose of a subpoena is to compel a witness to come to court to give testimony under oath.) The Supreme Court's role is to decide how the law applies to the facts that have been established in the trial courts.

There is an exception to the above statement. The Supreme Court has "original jurisdiction" over suits brought by one State against another State. An example might be a suit by Arizona against California to settle a boundary dispute or water rights. In such a case, the Supreme Court appoints a "Special Master" to hear the facts and make findings of fact and recommendations as to applicable law, but the Supreme Court makes the final decision on the facts and law. I assume the Special Master has subpoena power for this special purpose.

In California, the State Superior Courts are the highest level courts that issue subpoenas. Their federal counterparts are U. S. District Courts.