Strengths And Weaknesses Of Attitudinal Model
Legal Model – judges make their decisions based on the case facts; laws and precedents, which are previous, court cases where judges can pull their reasoning.
Strengths of this strategy would be that they use more facts instead of ideologies. Some weaknesses could be that since they interpret the constitution in the way they want, it may not always be the correct form of interpreting that law.
Attitudinal model – Since Judges and justices serve for life and the only way they can be removed from office is if they get impeached or removed (which has never happened, this gives them the full power the make the decisions and interpretation of the constitution with out fear of losing job, So what this means is that they will make
decisions …show more content…
Madison (1803), this was one of the most groundbreaking and influential legal proceedings ever to brought to the supreme court at the time. It was the first of its kind. The reason this court case was so influential was its dealings in administrative law which is defined as “the scope of law that involves any or all interactions with the Federal Government (The Court and Democracy).” This case can all be traced back to second president of the U.S. John Adams. In short, while Adams was president he attempted to appoint William Marbury as a justice of the peace but did not complete the task before required time frame ended with his presidency. The next president, Thomas Jefferson refused to finalize the commission process effectively rejecting Marbury’s appointment. Unhappy with these results, Marbury brought his case in front of the supreme court stating that it was unconstitutional for Adams to refuse his role as justice of the peace. The case was reviewed by Chief Justice John Marshal stating that Article III of the United States Constitution did not allow one branch of the Federal government to force action on the part of another branch. Ultimately, the court ruled that Jefferson being the new president had the final ruling on whether Marbury could finish his appointment process or not. This case was arguably the most important case in Supreme Court history due to the fact that it was the first U.S. Supreme Court case to apply the principle of “Judicial Review, the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution” (The court and Democracy) The decision made by Justice marshal this was a pivotal movement in the process of making the supreme court its own branch of
Strengths of this strategy would be that they use more facts instead of ideologies. Some weaknesses could be that since they interpret the constitution in the way they want, it may not always be the correct form of interpreting that law.
Attitudinal model – Since Judges and justices serve for life and the only way they can be removed from office is if they get impeached or removed (which has never happened, this gives them the full power the make the decisions and interpretation of the constitution with out fear of losing job, So what this means is that they will make
decisions …show more content…
Madison (1803), this was one of the most groundbreaking and influential legal proceedings ever to brought to the supreme court at the time. It was the first of its kind. The reason this court case was so influential was its dealings in administrative law which is defined as “the scope of law that involves any or all interactions with the Federal Government (The Court and Democracy).” This case can all be traced back to second president of the U.S. John Adams. In short, while Adams was president he attempted to appoint William Marbury as a justice of the peace but did not complete the task before required time frame ended with his presidency. The next president, Thomas Jefferson refused to finalize the commission process effectively rejecting Marbury’s appointment. Unhappy with these results, Marbury brought his case in front of the supreme court stating that it was unconstitutional for Adams to refuse his role as justice of the peace. The case was reviewed by Chief Justice John Marshal stating that Article III of the United States Constitution did not allow one branch of the Federal government to force action on the part of another branch. Ultimately, the court ruled that Jefferson being the new president had the final ruling on whether Marbury could finish his appointment process or not. This case was arguably the most important case in Supreme Court history due to the fact that it was the first U.S. Supreme Court case to apply the principle of “Judicial Review, the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution” (The court and Democracy) The decision made by Justice marshal this was a pivotal movement in the process of making the supreme court its own branch of