ipl-logo

Judicial Presidents: Two Positive Of Judicial Presidents

814 Words4 Pages

One positive of judicial presidents is that, it provides a guide on the outcome of the cases. This is good as it enables lawyers to guide its clients on resolving the case. Judicial precedents researches cases and based decisions on passed events. This means if a case that presently happened is exactly the same as what happened in the pass the judge can use that case as a guide line for the new case.
Another positive for judicial presidents, is that it saves time. The times saving comes from the fact that there is no drafting or passing laws. This is a good as it means that cases can be dealt more efficiently, they also save time as similar cases in the pass can now be dealt with more professionally in the present.
The last positive is flexibility, …show more content…

Lots of research can also lead some cases difficult to judge as finding distinguished scenarios can be difficult to assess.
Some cases can be isolated and beamed unreliable, this can also make the assessing of the case very difficult and inconsistent methods of judging the case could be put into practice. This is a big limitation of judicial precedents, as many cases are different and each have unique features that can alter other cases.
Judges sometimes goes against the section of powers law. This can be bad as it would mean that the judge is not enforcing the rules he or she is doing what they want.
Interpretation
In the interpretation aspect of the law. This includes the golden rule, literal rule, mischief rule and the Purposive rule. These rules have their unique features that can influence the case in one way or another. For example the golden rule can enable a judge to make a decision that can go against the rules that the judge needs to follow and interpret. The literal rule follows the law as it is and what it means, mischief rule is braking laws like public disorder or hazards that can affect the people around …show more content…

With judicial interpretation judges are able to have control over the case and the scenario of the case. For example (Re Sigsworth) [1935] http://e-lawresources.co.uk/Golden-rule.php

Another advantage on judicial interpretation is that is modernises the law, this is a big deal and a unique feature as judicial precedents follows the current and laws that happened in the pass judicial interpretation enable’s judges to look passed the law and make a decision based on moral decisions.
Purposive approach, this enables judges to see pass the case scenario and enable to act upon intended actions from people. This is good as there are malicious people that perform very unethical acts. Example (R v Allen) (1872)

Show More
Related
1506 Words | 7 Pages

The following two cases resulted in reversals of the convictions due to lack of counsel, but after this it became evident the Court was trying to draw the line of which trials to reverse. After these two cases, “in 1947 the Court made it plain that in non-capital cases it was sticking to the flexible rule of Betts v. Brady”(Lewis 118). Betts v. Brady helped to pave

Read More
1314 Words | 6 Pages

In regards to the detailed studies of both Segal and Spaeth, and Brenan and Stier, valid points had been made for both sides of the argument. The question posed is rather or not stare decisis still exist in the courts rulings today. Segal and Spaeth analyze the rulings of dissenting judges of landmark cases since the start of the Warren Court while excluding cases with unanimous decisions and cases without progeny within the legal period. The areas of which they dissected and constructed the particular datasets for analyzing is superb as it specifically narrows down the specific information there looking for within their results. The findings from there assessments concluded that precedent did not play a overwhelming role in the sub sequential

Read More
1518 Words | 7 Pages

To begin with, in the judicial system, there is an ongoing dispute over what compromises the proper amount of judicial power. This lack of agreement concerning policymaking power of the Courts is bestowed within the discussion between judicial activism and judicial restraint. In general, these two philosophies represent the conflicting approaches taken by judges in their task of interpretation. Consequently, the Court’s decision could be framed in terms of activism or restraint by either changing or upholding public policy.

Read More
167 Words | 1 Pages

The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications.

Read More
1028 Words | 5 Pages

Madison was a landmark case in the U.S. Supreme court history. President John Adams filled the Supreme court with 16 new judgeships before he left office. On the other hand, some of the appointments were made too late, the letters were not delivered by the time Adams left. Advised by Jefferson, James Madison the Secretary of State, refused to deliver William Marbury’s letter, which was appointed by president Adams as Justice of Peace. John Marshall, Chief Justice also appointed by John Adams argued that the Constitution did not authorize the Supreme Court to take such cases directly.

Read More
1094 Words | 5 Pages

If we look at it in this light, it seems we are heading away from the rule of law and into the rule of man by the judges. Under a rule of law, the law is the highest authority and everyone in the country is under that law. The law creates a consistent standard of conduct that should be easy to understand. Under the rule of man, there is no consistency in ruling. Precedent is considered, but if the judge disagrees with the previous ruling, he can disregard it and issue the sentence or ruling that they think is correct.

Read More
462 Words | 2 Pages

In addition to judicial selection methods, at the federal level, the president and senate get to appoint seats to judges, in which they will have for life. In my opinion, I think this selection method is good to some extent because I trust that the president and senate have good judgment when it comes to picking judges that will be independent, fair, and accountable. At the state level, electing judges varies from state to state. In

Read More
1065 Words | 5 Pages

Judicial review has been perceived as inconsistent with the significance that democracies properly attach political participation and to equality. Judges under the rule of law are seen as a threat to the courts under a democratic ruling. Judges who conform to the criminal and civil justice in a democratic ruling obtain to the traditional values in moderate courts. The citizens who live under a democratic ruling develop an expectation of judicial power which is expected to be exercised independently. Judges are likely to be a danger to public society since they disregard to speak to cases of a majority rule under racial discrimination.

Read More
224 Words | 1 Pages

I chose a photograph to rhetorically analyze for this discussion. I saw this photograph on one of my friend's Instagram feed and I had a lot of thoughts about it, so I thought it would be perfect to analyze. My initial reaction to this photograph is thinking how creative, yet strange the imagination of the creator is. Of course, this photograph is lift to interpretation, but I perceived the purpose of the photograph to be of amusement because it makes me laugh and smile every time I see it. Even if you personally do not like cats, I am sure that this photograph will make you smile.

Read More
427 Words | 2 Pages

Back in 1975, there was a major case called, Payton V. New York. Theodore Payton was suspected of murdering a gas station manager, they found evidence within his home that connected him with the crime. What caused the problem was the fact New York had a law that allowed unwarranted searches if the person was a suspect. Based off the oral argument presented by Oyez, the police said it didn't count as the evidence because it was in public view when entering the home. It had to be appealed before it was determined as unconstitutional.

Read More
741 Words | 3 Pages

Thomas Jefferson gave a warning about the confines of judicial review and he thinks that judicial review would make the constitution nothing but “a mere thing of wax in the hands of the Judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.” I think that Jefferson is right and that judicial review does indeed give the Judiciary the power to see law as they please. The idea portrayed by Jefferson is even more of a realization when you add that the Judiciary already regulates the law and interprets it as they see fit, grounded in the constitution, but judicial review gives that power over all branches… It’s a huge concept to wrap your mind around that the judicial branch could in fact arise this power out of the constitution derived from an interpretation of words, but it’s true. This power alone is enough to drive the argument against the principle that is judicial review.

Read More
517 Words | 3 Pages

The Supreme Courts job is not to correct the errors of other courts but to resolve substantial legal issues. The courts own guidelines say there must be "compelling reasons" for accepting a case. When the supreme court accepts a case the majority of the justices disagree with the rulings made in the lower courts. The courts then make a decision indicating which party won the case.

Read More
801 Words | 4 Pages

This may cause a judge to render a decision based on obligation instead of holding true to their beliefs. This pressure is not easily felt as intensely by appointed judges, especially those with lengthy terms. In considering the equity of the pros and cons it is my opinion that the existing system in place works best. Every system is flawed.

Read More
1276 Words | 6 Pages

Steve Jobs, the founder of the multi-billion dollar company Apple and was the flagship leader of Apple till his death, once said “My job is not to be easy on people. My job is to take these great people we have and to push them and make them even better.” What Steve Jobs is stating is that he isn’t an easy going boss but rather pushes the people under him to work even better than they are. A leader doesn’t have to be a ruthless, cold person, or a down-to-earth relatable guy, but rather somebody who can motivate, control, and attempt to steer their crew in the right path of success and prosperity, quite in the literal sense for Odysseus. Odysseus is the main character in Homer’s

Read More
1268 Words | 6 Pages

The law is meant to provide justice to people. So the main advantages of the common law system is that it is consistent, adaptive, equal and independent. Consistency is achieved through the precedent as the base for the decisions, not the personal attitudes of the judges. The parties, involved in the process, are expecting that their case would be decided as the similar one, it creates certainty in getting equal justice and stability. Precedents are usually developed in the higher courts by the senior

Read More

More about Judicial Presidents: Two Positive Of Judicial Presidents

Related Topics

Open Document