ipl-logo

The Pros And Cons Of The US Judicial System

1022 Words5 Pages

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 …show more content…

The Executive and Congressional branches have many checks imposed upon them while the Supreme Court experiences only a few: the ability of congress to approve and the ability of the president to appoint justices. These limited checks complement the absence of a term limit or formal set of qualifications imposed on justices, thus granting the US Supreme Court a high level of independence that has its merits and shortcomings (Baum, 2003). Concern arises as these checks are rarely enforced; the United States has not yet seen the impeachment of a justice and although the trend is changing, very few appointments are actually rejected (Nix, 2016), (Supreme Court Nominations: present-1789, 2017). While the Unites States has witnessed a moderately positive judicial influence, the path to corruption widens considerably in the presence of high levels of independence within a governmental body. Independence, while necessary to governmental maintenance, necessitates oversight; a cohesive government must “control the governed; and in the next place … control itself”, exhibiting independence while limiting totalitarian instincts (Publius, 2008). Concerns also arise when analyzing the origin of judicial review; namely the capacity of the Supreme Court to independently establish it. Due to its absence within the original Constitution, the establishment of judicial review was subsequent to the Constitution’s implementation. In the famous 1803 Marbury v Madison case the Supreme Court itself established the ability to declare laws unconstitutional, thus setting a precedent of the court’s potential to expand its own power without limit. The ability of the Supreme Court to expand its authority inherently defies the nature of checks and balances by allowing for exponential growth of its jurisdiction and power without checks by the Executive or

Show More
Related

Summary Of The Supreme Court Case Of Gideon V. Wainwright

1023 Words | 5 Pages

When people think of how government works, unless they’ve taken a government class, they usually think of Congress making laws and the President doing pretty much everything else. No one pays much attention to the Supreme Court unless there is a landmark case or something else to grab the news — like the recent death of Justice Antonin Scalia. But the Supreme Court does much more than you’d think regarding keeping the political machine running like a well-oiled … machine. Through not only interpretation of the law, but also judicial activism, the Supreme Court shows it can have as much influence over the laws of the land as either of the other branches of the federal government. In this paper, I will analyze the decision-making methods of the Court using the cases of Gideon v. Wainwright and Betts v. Brady.

Read More

How Did Marshall Use Marbury V Madison As Epochal

756 Words | 4 Pages

The idea the the Supreme court alone had the last word on the question of constitutionality. In this landmark case, Marshall inserted the keystone into the arch that supported the tremendous power of the Supreme Court in American life.” This textual evidence shows that John Marshall from the previous paragraph that he pushed the authority of the court which lead to now the promotion of judicial review. The judicial review was the idea that the Supreme Court had the last response on the questioning of constitutionality. The judicial review was a long term ramification because it is still used still today to review the a law that is brought before it through a

Read More

Summary Of Federalist No. 78 By Alexander Hamilton

1538 Words | 7 Pages

Conversely, in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case, Chief Justice John Marshall interpreted the power of judicial review expressed in the constitution differently. He understood the court’s ability to “strike down” legislation as the command of the majority, which was embedded in the Constitution (O’Brien 173). This essay will analyze the juxtaposition between Alexander Hamilton’s blueprint for the Supreme Court in Federalist No. 78 and Chief Justice John Marshall’s

Read More

Elastic Clause

933 Words | 4 Pages

Woodrow Wilson once referred to the Supreme Court as “a constant constitutional convention in continuous session”, due to the role they have played in interpreting the constitution as it is written. Due to the ambiguity found in much of the phrasing in the constitution, judicial interpretation of the constitution can be considered both necessary and inevitable (Comer, Gruhl et al., 2001). The courts have the power to declare unconstitutional the actions of the other branches and units of the government in what is known as judicial review (Tannahil, 2002). The first case in which the court elaborated on the principle of judicial review was that of Marbury v. Madison in 1803 and put forward that in the case of conflict between the constitution and a statute, it is “the duty of the judicial department to say what the law is” (Smith, 1975). Following this, the case of Fletcher v Peck (1810) is of equal importance as it was the first case in which a state law was declared by the court to be unconstitutional.

Read More

Constitution Protect Against Tyranny Essay

557 Words | 3 Pages

The Judicial Branch is the judge of any laws that the President or Congress passes, they decide if the law goes along with the Constitution. Without this system our government would fall into a complete disaster and most likely become a dictatorship. Given these points, it is obvious that the power in our government needs to be

Read More

Pros And Cons Of The Texas Judicial System

800 Words | 4 Pages

But, then, there is always the benefit of being able to remove judges. Appointed judges are chosen for a life term. Elections ensure accountability though not necessarily for the

Read More

Stonewall Riots Essay

648 Words | 3 Pages

This is evident since the judicial branch cannot enforce power, it cannot approach matters, but matters have to seek the judiciary, and public opinion influences the court’s decisions to a great extent. When the President and Congress think that

Read More

Explain The Strengths Of The Judicial Branch

1067 Words | 5 Pages

Ultimately, the judicial branch has to go back to what the founding fathers intended for the court’s purpose and to use the power accordingly. To maintain the strength of the branch, the courts must think about what is constitutionally right. Their decisions should reflect the amendments as well. “Judicial power plays an important role in the rule of law, even while it comes frequently into tension with norms of democratic rule” (Friedman & Delaney, 2011, p. 57, para. 1). This is the only way that citizens will feel like their rights are truly protected.

Read More

Judicial Tyranny The New Kings Of America Summary

2308 Words | 10 Pages

All things considered, Mark Sutherland has brought together a provocative corps of respected scholars and legal thinkers who collectively offer an incisive critique of a judiciary gone awry while they offer constructive solutions for reform. They make it abundantly clear that we the American people do not have to be slaves to the edicts of these black-robed deities. Their adroit assessment of the federal judiciary is intelligent, rooted in a principled esteem for the rule of law and constitutional popular rule, and their solutions are constitutional defensible, practical and tenable. One thing is resoundingly clear, we must stand up to these demigods in block robes that contravene the design of our federal republic and offer outlandish decisions at odds with the will of the vast majority of the people. It is paramount that the American people awaken and voice their discontent to their elected representatives in Congress if we are to abate judicial tyranny.

Read More

Missouri Compromise

1291 Words | 6 Pages

Conflict with the Courts falls under the AP theme: Politics and Power. Madison’s midnight appointed judges did not have the chance to be given their commission letters and future judge Marbury called upon the Supreme Court to force Secretary Madison to give over his commission. Their legendary decision to not force an executive official to act was a win for the current administration because it kept more Federalists from gaining power in the judiciary system. Their overturning of Congress’s Judiciary Act of 1789 as unconstitutional was of more significance than their lack of action in commanding Madison to deliver letters. The Supreme Court overturning the Judiciary Act was caused by their realization that the judiciary branch should not have

Read More

Examples Of Improving The Articles Of Confederation

1576 Words | 7 Pages

This sets the stage for the checks and balances from the judicial and legislative branches of government that must be, and have been, done at times in order to reign in the power of the presidency. The successes, not only in the subsequent leadership, growth, and ability of the executive office, but the successful checks and balances in the 20th century, such as Watergate, U.S. v Nixon, and others, are thanks to the founder’s framing of the way our government operates. Strong leadership, while having a guaranteed opportunity to change a government that may have become too powerful, is an inherently American ideal, and is what the founders intended for the future of our

Read More

Assess The Power Of Judicial Review Pros And Cons

786 Words | 4 Pages

Judicial review refers to the ability of the Court to interpret laws and executive actions in terms of constitutionality. If such law is found to be violative of the Constitution, or the actions taken are beyond the powers granted by the Constitution, it is liable to be struck down by the Court as void. Marbury v. Madison set precedent to the role and power of the judicial branch. Chief Justice John Marshall asserted that the Constitution was a superior law that cannot be changed by ordinary means. In addition, the acts of Congress, the executive, and the states reflect temporary view of what the law is and if these acts conflict with the fundamental law of the Constitution, then they are not entitled to enforcement and must be disregarded.

Read More

Judicial Review Pros And Cons

741 Words | 3 Pages

Robert Isenhour Federal Government 110 10/10/17 Judicial Review Judicial Review had been obsolete until 1803 when the need for it arose in the case of Marbury vs. Madison, where it was then found to become a new component to the Judicial Branch. I am here to discuss why judicial review is and shall remain a doctrine commonly used in constitutional law. Judicial Review is the power for courts to review other government branches to determine the validity of its actions whether it be constitutional or unconstitutional. These ‘acts’ can be described as legislation passed by congress, presidential orders and actions, or all state and local governmental actions.

Read More

Why The Judicial Branch Is The Most Powerful

478 Words | 2 Pages

Hana Kim Professor Yvonne Wollenberg Law and Politics 106 7 October 2015 Title In the United States government, there are three branches called the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. Out of these three, the judicial branch is the most powerful. The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court, the court with the most power in the country, and other federal courts that are lower in the system; the purpose of this branch is to look over laws and make sure they are constitutional and reasonable.

Read More

The Pros And Cons Of Judicial Review

190 Words | 1 Pages

The arguments presented by opponents of judicial review typically place heavy attention on the fact that the legislature is popularly elected. In contrast, I reckon that judicial review is not nearly as harmful as its opponents sometimes describe. In fact, it plays a useful role in keeping the legislature in check. For instance, as candidates of Congress and President are elected for specific terms, they might want to pass laws that reflect the pressing concerns at the times rather than considering the Constitution laws that would govern our country for the long term. On the other hand, the Supreme Court justices, who do not serve specific terms, are in the best position to evaluate whether specific laws abide by the principles of the Constitution

Read More

More about The Pros And Cons Of The US Judicial System

Related Topics

Open Document