The judicial review process is an important aspect of the US Court system. The process involves the use of powers by the Federal Courts to void the congress' acts that direct conflict with the Constitution. The Marbury v. Madison is arguably the landmark case that relates to Judicial Review. The Marbury v. Madison case was written in the year 1803 by the Chief Justice at that time named John Marshall. Thomas Jefferson won an election on the Democratic - Republican Party that had just been formed creating a panicky political atmosphere having defeated John Adams of the previous ruling party.
John Marshall’s Supreme Court hearings had a positive effect on the United States. From court cases like McCulloch v. Maryland, declared that the federal courts could decide if state laws were unconstitutional. The McCulloch v. Maryland trial went to the supreme court because Maryland had put a tax in place that too 2% of all assets of the bank or a flat rate of $30,000. John Marshall saw this tax as unconstitutional for the simple fact that people were being denied their property under the state legislature. From the Gibbons v. Ogden case, congress’s power over interstate commerce was strengthened.
The founding father’s idea when they created the Constitution was to prevent a centralized government. As expressed by James Madison in Federalist No. 51, they believe that the power surrendered by people would be divided between the federal and state governments, creating balance of power that would enable both governments to control each other. Over time, the balance of power between the federal and state governments has shifted in favor of the federal government and this has taken place with the help of the Constitution and by enactments of Congress. The role that Chief Justice John Marshall played in defining the power of the federal and state governments during the early 19th century is important to mention because he shaped the nation.
The American Legal System The American legal system has been influenced by many historical rulers and laws. Three that have influenced the American legal system the most are Roman laws, moral laws and Hammurabi’s code in my opinion. One legal system that influenced the American legal system are Roman laws. I picked Roman law because it said that law has been defined as the “Art of social control”; a system of rules regulating the conduct of man.
In the past, certain principles of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Fourth Amendment changed with each Chief Justice. Between the years 1953 and 2005, there had been three of them, each modifying the main focus and making exceptions to searches and seizures by police. Their names were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Warren E. Burger, and William H Rehnquist. With each alternation of each of them came the names referring to the Supreme Court for those time periods. First, the Warren Court, focused on bringing attention to the exclusionary rule in order to protect citizens from being charged with ilegally-obtained evidence.
Great Britain provided many basic constitutional principles to the colonies. These ideas founded our government and shaped our country. Some principles we adopted from England helped develop our representative government, one being republicanism. In all colonies except for Georgia, republicanism was a common practice.
In his book Judicial Tyranny: The New Kings of America, Mark Sutherland has assembled a wonderful cast of Christian attorneys, jurists, political scientists, and clergy who offer a rather perceptive analysis of judicial tyranny and our hope and means of restraining an overactive judiciary. Contributors include James Dobson, former U.S. Attorney General Edward Meese, former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore, Don Feder, David Gibbs, Howard Phillips, Rev. Rick Scarborough, Phyllis Schlafly, and Herbert Titus among others. For too long, Congress has been complacent in the face of an overreaching, activist judiciary that has been out-of-step with the will of the great majority of the American people, and the judiciary has overstepped the bounds of
Legal history is closely linked with understanding the law. It outlines how history has caused the law to change and evolve over time as well as seeing the law as a pragmatic response to emergencies, power struggle and changing notions of the public good. Prime examples of how legal history is relevant to understanding the law is the Royal proclamation in 1763 issued by King George III, the Quebec Act in 1774. As well as the Norman Conquest which established the feudal system. These historical events all greatly outline the historical development of the law in Canada.
The Constitution of the United States of America is praised for its famous opening line “we the people” as it establishes a democracy in which “the people” are ostensibly able to dictate the ways in which their country will operate. In order to implement a democracy of “the people”, the authors of the Constitution foresaw the need for a system of checks and balances in which each governing branch might check the other in order to prevent a disproportionate balance of power. Each branch today has the power to review, in moderation, the decisions of the others. One such example of this system is judicial review; in present day this term is ubiquitous, yet the idea was explicitly absent from the Constitution. While reasons for this oversight
Throughout the years, distinct constitutional methodologies have developed and are considered for judicial interpretation. From the various that have developed, Originalism stands out the most to me. Originalism was created for the purpose of considering original objectives when the United States Constitution is interpreted by the court. The foundation of this methodology is to consider the original text of the United States Constitution as the primary source to be used for interpretation. The US Constitution is considered the absolute law of the land and therefore should be used explicitly as guidance in judicial interpretation.
While there are many more concepts of law that the book mentions I feel that these are the most important concepts of law that somehow are the foundations of the legal system in the United
The three levels within the federal courts are: the U.S. Magistrate Courts, the U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The magistrate courts are the lowest level and as such are limited to trying misdemeanors, setting bail amounts and assisting the district courts. The U.S. District Courts are the federal branch of original jurisdiction courts. These are responsible for criminal trials and giving guilty or not guilty verdicts. The U.S. Courts of Appeals are responsible for all the appeals from U.S. district courts.
Roman law, was effective in the Eastern Roman Empire (331-1453), and is also the basis of our legal system, civil system which most countries apply, from Europe to Latin America. Even English and North American Common law also were influenced by Roman law, particularly in the legal glossary - stare decisis, culpa in contrahendo, pacta sunt servanda. The primary document that all Roman laws were included was the Twelve Tables. This attempt was the earliest of Romans to create a Code of Law and is also the earliest (surviving) piece of literature coming from the Romans.
The Introduction The precedent is a decided legal case, which is used as a basis for deciding later similar cases. The English Law system is a legal system where the precedent has a great weight. This law system can be subdivided into two main interrelated branches: statute (or statutory) law and common law. Statute is an Act of Parliament, which starts its life as a bill, goes through the parliament, receives royal assent and becomes law.
Material Sources: Material sources of law includes: • Historical Sources: Suppose no statutes exist, then court refers to common law or case law. The principles or set of rules framed traditionally in an unauthorized or in an unofficial way, but are adopted and endorsed as rules, and decisions are made on them as well. Such sources are outlined as COMMON LAW OF EQUITY. The essential characteristic of common law is that it ascends as precedent. When the parties have disagreement on the law, then court looks for previous rulings and precedents on it.
