BH There's a couple of slightly related questions
Regarding secular court in halacha, but none touch on this special question
There's a halacha, recorded in the Gemara and Rambam, that a "Zakayn Mamray", rebellious elder, is only liable if he makes a ruling that contradicts the beis din hahadol in a way that could lead to a punishment of kares
"A "rebellious elder" is not liable for execution unless he is a sage, erudite enough to issue halachic judgments who has received semichah from the Sanhedrin and who differs with that court with regard to a matter whose willful violation is punishable by kerait and whose inadvertent violation requires a sin offering"
When it later explains the details of the case, it says an example where the Zakayn Mamray makes a false ruling in a monetary case, which results as the money being taken from One litigant to the other, by the court, as being "stolen" money, and if one later uses that money to engage/marry a woman, she is not halachically married, and thus it could lead to a prohibition of kares:
"if they differed with regard to a matter of financial law or with regard to the number of judges able to adjudicate matters of financial law, he is liable. For according to the opinion which maintains that the defendant is liable to the plaintiff, everything which he expropriated from him was expropriated according to law and according to the decisions of the court. But according to the opposing view, whatever he expropriated is stolen property. If he uses it to consecrate a woman, she is not consecrated. And yet according to the opinion that the person expropriated his own property, the consecration is valid. If another person engages in relations with her willfully, he is liable for kerait and if he engages in relations with her inadvertently, he is liable to bring a sin offering. Thus their difference of opinion led to a matter whose willful violation is punishable by kerait and whose inadvertent violation requires a sin offering"
The question now, which I have not seen addressed anywhere I could find, is regarding secular courts
If one were to say that really all secular courts should be trying laws in accordance with the 7 laws of Noach only, and if it could be proven that they currently are not doing so, does that mean that all money they take away from one litigant and give to the other is stolen, and all jurors would thus be partially liable for stealing? If so would there then be other reprocussions about anyone, Jewish or not, attending secular jury duty (again IF it would be shown that the current system is not in accordance with the 7 laws of Noach)?