If something is constitutional, it goes with and agrees with what the constitution stated. Checks and balances would change Animal Farm in a really big way. Checks and balances would help Animal Farm to eliminate Napoleon's abuse of power when he killed lots of animals, slept on a bed, and allowed pigs to get up later than others. Napoleon killed lots of animals even though the sixth commandment states "No animal shall kill another animal." (Orwell 25). Three sheep, three hen, and a goose were all ordered to be killed by Napoleon. When animals spoke up about Napoleon breaking the commandment, Napoleon changed the commandment to "No animal shall kill any other animal without cause." (Orwell 91). If there was checks and balances, the judicial branch could have impeached Napoleon for breaking the law. Napoleon also wouldn't be able to change the law or alter it in any way with checks and balances. Also, the other animals would be smarter …show more content…
Commandment 7 stated: "All animals are equal." (Orwell 25). If the pigs got more rest, then that is implying that the pigs are above all the other animals. Therefore, it is breaking the commandment. The commandment was later changed to "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." (Orwell 134). If there was checks and balances, the judicial branch could determine whether Napoleon's actions were constitutional or unconstitutional. Also, if there was a legislative branch, they would create the laws and not Napoleon. This would limit Napoleon's abuse of power. Checks and balances would help Animal Farm to eliminate Napoleon's abuse of power when he killed lots of animals, slept on a bed, and let pigs get up later than others. Checks and balances would have made an effect on Napoleon, but if he acted the same, he would definitely get impeached. This novel shows that a country with checks and balances wouldn't have very much conflict with