Strongest Judicial Branch

Which branch of the federal government (executive, legislative, judicial) would you consider the weakest? The strongest? Would our system of government function more or less effectively if we changed one of these branches and how they functioned? Please use specific factual support for your position and analysis.

The federal government is comprised of three separate branches: Legislative, Executive and Judicial. The powers and duties of each branch are defined by US Constitution and the branches have control over Congress, the President and the Federal Courts, respectively. The separation of powers between the branches follow a trias politica principle where the branches of the US are divided into individual entities, each with distinct

James Madison wrote in Essay No. 48 of the Federalist Papers that “The legislative [branch] derives superiority… [i]ts constitutional powers [are] more extensive, and less susceptible to precise limits… [it] is not possible to give each [branch] an equal [number of checks on the other branches]”. Congress is not reliant on either the executive or the judicial branches for its authority or election; Congress has the ability to pass law over a president’s veto, approve members of the courts, and impeach members of either executive or judicial branches as Article II, Section 4 of the Constitution states. The federal reserve also obtains its authority from Congress, which means that the legislative can regulate the economic prosperity of the nation to a certain extent. Congress also has the ability to declare war, set taxes, and appropriate the budget for the other branches. The executive and judicial branches of government have developed far more power than the founders believed they would possess; but as Alexander Hamilton pointed out,”that power which holds the purse strings absolutely must rule” and this holds true even

Changing any of the branches of government would shift the balance of power greatly in a certain direction which would in turn prompt a less efficient and effective government. As James Madison articulates in Essay no. 51 of the Federalist Papers, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition.”; the theory behind the division or power between the branches is designed to maximise freedom and provide each branch some sense of individualism. An adjustment within the system would only serve to reduce the political institutions’ effectiveness. John Adams defended the balance of power given to the branches in the Constitution by stating: “In the mixed government we contend for, the ministers, at least of the executive power, are responsible for every instance of the exercise of it; and if they dispose of a single commission by corruption, they are responsible to a house of representatives, who may, by impeachment, make them responsible before a senate, where they may be accused, tried, condemned, and punished, by independent judges.” The only issue in the system is maintaining the balance of power, changing the functionality of any branch would skew the system entirely and hinder the progression of liberty and good government - the rationale for the separation of powers given in the federalist