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
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
756 Words | 4 Pages

The Senate failed to muster enough votes to convict and remove Chase. The precedent thus established was fortunate. From that day to this, no really serious attempt has been made to reshape the Supreme Court by the impeachment weapon. Jefferson’s ill advised attempt at “judge breaking’’ was a reassuring victory for the independence of the judiciary and for the separation of powers among the three branches of the federal government.”

Read More
800 Words | 4 Pages

In addition, James Madison stated the idea of Checks and Balances and what it will do to the government, “...the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that they may be a check on the other... The three branches should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other.” This statement means that each branch should have a different power, so they wouldn’t have any constitutional control over each other. That makes each branch check on the other branches to make sure they are doing everything correctly. One way that the Judicial Branch can check on the Legislative Branch is that when Congress creates laws, the Court can declare laws unconstitutional because some laws might not be a good idea for the people of the country, so the Judicial has the power to take away the possible law.

Read More
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
1163 Words | 5 Pages

At its inception, the Supreme Court was a vague idea created by tired delegates at the Constitutional Convention. Today, the judiciary is arguably the strongest branch in government. The person responsible for the inception of such a strong judicial branch is John Marshall. With his decisions in the Supreme Court, John Marshall used his Constitutional interpretation to grant powerful jurisdiction over the federal government, and to ensure a republic of the people rather than being in complete control of rich white men for the entirety of America. These decisions led Marshall to shape the Supreme Court by his granting of power to match the other branches of government to the modern age.

Read More
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
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
648 Words | 3 Pages

The system of checks and balances is meant to even power within the Federal Government, but within we know it has its flaws. The judiciary has the least power of them all it is meant to evaluate laws that have been challenged. Executive carries out laws whereas the legislative makes laws. The formation of interest groups and the actions taken by the public greatly impact the power of the judiciary branch as well. Alexander Hamilton 's Federalist NO. 78 paper describes the correct reasoning of as to why the judicial branch has the least power of all

Read More
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
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
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
786 Words | 4 Pages

Madison, judicial review is the power of the judicial branch to declare statutes, actions, and bureaucratic agencies of the government at any level unconstitutional, and its main purpose is to check and balance the other two branches. This function is not purely a review of lower level courts by the Supreme Court. However, this power has been questioned due to its lack of direct coverage in the Constitution. Judicial review is also believed to be a conflict of interest, provided that Supreme Court Justice John Marshall ruled in favor of the courts. Judicial review is and has been controversial in the past because of how politically powerful it can be.

Read More
1062 Words | 5 Pages

Unlike the other two branches of government, the judicial branch does not have very well-defined powers under the Constitution. While the Constitution established a Supreme Court and gave it “original jurisdiction in all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be a party” and appellate jurisdiction in all other cases, the Supreme Court was not viewed as an important body (US Const. art. III, sec. 2). Over time, however, the Supreme Court has evolved into a powerful government entity primarily through judicial review, the “power of a court to declare acts of governmental bodies contrary to the Constitution null and void” (Neubauer, 492).

Read More
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
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

More about The Pros And Cons Of The US Judicial System

Related Topics

Open Document