ipl-logo

Summary Of Federal No. 78

457 Words2 Pages

In the essay Federal No. 78 deals with the proposed structure of federal courts, their powers and jurisdiction, the method of appointing judges, and related matters. Alexander Hamilton begins in explaining his views on the independence on judge and evaluates the doctrine of the judicial review. Resulting in the Court believing that the Supreme Court violated part of the Constitution, Alexander Hamilton then evaluates the question of whether the Supreme Court should be able to declare acts of Congress null and void. Hamilton focuses on his three main points of the judicial department. First: the mode of appointing judges. Second: The tenure by which they are to hold their places. Third: The partition of the judiciary authority between different courts, and their relations to each other. He reaches his points in how he believes the things the judicial branch has authority to do and describing the different effects it has on the Constitution. …show more content…

Alexander Hamilton longs to compare the judicial to the other branches of government and, based on his findings, concludes that the judicial branch therefore is the least harmful to the rights of the Constitution. He says it has “neither Force nor Will but merely judgment”. This makes the judicial branch seem weak because with his statement, Alexander Hamilton connects the executive branch have the authority of ‘force’ being that it allows decision making within the courts. Alexander Hamilton also relates the ‘will’ to the cannot stand as activist based on the legislative branch. I agree with Hamilton on his opinion of how the judicial branch strands distinct from the others because it is in fact true to that the legislative and execute branches hold more weight in causing more danger to the rights of the Constitution than the

Show More
Related
323 Words | 2 Pages

Final Exam Part I: BQ7 Hamilton’s Federalists 78 A Defense of the Judiciary Alexander Hamilton declared the Judiciary was not dangerous or too powerful under the new Constitution. According to Hamilton the Judiciary was the least dangerous of all the branches and was delegated the fewest powers. Unlike the Executive’s power of the sword and the Legislature’s power of the purse the Judiciary was only vested with the power to judge the law. The Judiciary was further diminished in power as it was dependent upon the Executive to enforce its decisions ( FP pg. 402). In addition Hamilton dismissed Brutus’s assertion that the Judiciary needed to be subordinate to legislature to prevent abuse of power.

Read More
243 Words | 1 Pages

SCOTUS is a far cry from Alexander Hamilton’s claim in The Federalist #78 that the judiciary “will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because, the judiciary lacked the powers of the purse and of the sword, it had neither force nor will, but merely judgment.

Read More
143 Words | 1 Pages

I disagree with Alexander Hamilton’s statement that the "Judiciary is the weakest branch of government. " The United States government is divided among three branches: the executive, the legislative, and the judicial. The executive and legislative branches are selected by the people, but the members of the Judicial Branch are chosen by the President. Which already shows how important the judicial branch is. The judicial branch is essential because it supplements the other two branches.

Read More
247 Words | 1 Pages

This statement from the passage shows that the Supreme Court is depended on to choose what’s right and what’s wrong for us. Secondly, I believe that the Supreme Court is given too much power because the Judicial branch, which includes the Supreme Court, is envisioned as superior than the others. In

Read More
688 Words | 3 Pages

The articles written by Antonin Scalia and Stephen Breyer both contribute valid insight on how the Constitution should be interpreted. They, however, end up taking conflicting views on whether to adopt what is known as a living constitution or to bind the judiciary by the original meaning of the document. Throughout their works, the authors mention the importance of objectivity, judicial restraint and the historical context in which the Constitution was written under and whether or not it should apply to the United States today. Scalia argues in favor of the originalist approach, stating that he supports neither a strict nor a loose interpretation of the Constitution, but rather, a reasonable interpretation. Breyer sides with the cosequentialist ideals, claiming that active participation in collective power is paramount when it comes to evaluating the Constitution's place in American law.

Read More
1535 Words | 7 Pages

Rehnquist argues that Marshall saw the constitution, not only as a document, but as a “charter” that represented the will of the people (O’Brien 166). However, the argument made by Rehnquist reinforces Marshall’s interpretation of judicial review as the will of the majority. By comparison, Judge William Justice takes a different approach from Rehnquist on the interpretation of Judicial review. Judge Justice argues that Hamilton’s intention was for the court to be a “bulwark” against “Majoritarian excesses,” (O’Brien 181) so as to protect against the tyranny of the majority. Likewise, Hamilton saw the same principle of the court as a “bulwark” against congress.

Read More
1576 Words | 7 Pages

Determining the specificities of what the framers originally intended, however, is the subject to some debate. Saikrishna Prakash, a distinguished Professor of Law at the University of Virginia, analyses the question of original meaning of executive power in his essay “The Essential Meaning of Executive Power”. He argues that not only is the president chief legislator, chief military officer, and the nation's top diplomat, he is “first and foremost...the chief executive empowered by the executive power to execute Congress’s laws and to control the law execution of executive officers”(Prakash, 820). He also acknowledges Justice Scalia’s assessment “that a complete understanding of the executive power might take 7,000 pages and thirty years to complete”(Prakash, 820). Suggesting that we have to be cautious in trying to analyze the presidency from a pure originalist point of view, and that we have to adapt to the ambiguities that result from the evolution of presidential power.

Read More
1567 Words | 7 Pages

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton lays out his vision for how the Supreme Court of the United States should function. In it, he assures that one of the key roles of the Supreme Court will be to check the constitutionality of congressional legislation in order to protect the individual rights of the people. However, in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case in 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall interprets the power of judicial review from Article III of the constitution, in a way in which the court becomes a powerful branch of government. With Marshall’s interpretation, the court is able to “strike down” legislation by the command of the people which is embedded in the Constitution (O’Brien 173). Hamilton intended for the court to

Read More
1570 Words | 7 Pages

From his perspective, the court would focus on interpreting the constitutionality of the laws written by Congress in the light of the constitution. Hamilton’s sole purpose was to protect people from tyranny. In other words, the court’s job was not to impose their will on Congress, but to make sure laws were being written to respect people’s basic constitutional rights. Hamilton also purposed for the court to function as a protector from political factions within the political parties that might arise. He knew that special interest groups would attempt to pass certain legislation to benefit their self-interest.

Read More
1317 Words | 6 Pages

I would have to disagree with Mr. Hamilton because the Judiciary, specifically the Supreme Court, is a powerful branch of the

Read More
1001 Words | 5 Pages

In The Declaration Of Independence (Jefferson) paragraph 16, it recalls, “the dignity and solubility of governments in all its branches, the morals of the people, and every blessing of society depend on so much upon an upright and skillful administration of justice, that the judicial power ought to be distinct from both of the legislative and executive.” This quote demonstrates that the government can and will only work if it is in the best interest of its people, and checks and balances between two other branches do not allow overstepping of one branch or the other, relating back to how the government is 3 branches are affiliated with the United States government. In addition, disclosed by Thomas Jefferson: Best Of Enemies paragraph 3 (Chernow) “The two enemies of the people are criminals and the government, so let us tie the second down with the chain of the constitution so the second will not become a legalized version of the first.” This quote says that if we follow Hamilton's ideas that the government will have a power to protect the wrong doings instead of preventing

Read More
349 Words | 2 Pages

In 1787-1788 eighty-five essays appeared in the New York newspaper, they were supporting the federal constitution, Alexander Hamilton was one of the writers. Hamilton was responding to antifederalist who had claimed that absence of the Bill of Rights and a powerful Judiciary would bring oppression to the people. Hamilton argued that Judiciary was a weak branch of government compared to Executive and Legislature because it lacked an army to command and would only react to what the two branches of the government had proposed. I disagree with the statement by Alexander Hamilton that judiciary is the weakest branch of the government, maybe at that time it could have been viewed as so, but its power has increased through several amendments (Jellum, 2008). The Congress creates law, for example, they created the National Prohibition in the 1920s, and the president executes the laws by ensuring all the laws passed by the Congress are implemented.

Read More
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

Read More
243 Words | 1 Pages

I disagree with Alexander Hamilton 's statement that the "Judiciary is the weakest branch of government” today. It might be the case because the judiciary branch is hardly in the media. Both the president and congress always making noise. They are always on the news, the president is trying to do something and complaining that congress is holding him back, for example “Obama Care”, and congress is all talk and no action especially, for issues that matter to the normal people for example, healthcare and taxes issues. On the other hand, judiciary branch is quite and hardly in the news and that’s what Hamilton probably meant by the “weakest branch” (The Judiciary, 2017).

Read More
474 Words | 2 Pages

In which he also believed this was the main purpose of this branch. The effects of the judicial branch being “least dangerous” provides protection of the Constitution, which will protect the liberty of the people. Hamilton also believed that this branch be separated from the others. With this branch being independent, it keeps powers separate and keeps Judges unbiased regardless of what the majority may want. It keeps them true to what is right per the law.

Read More

More about Summary Of Federal No. 78

Open Document