Summary Of Federalist No 78 By Framer Alexander Hamilton

"It may truly be said to have neither force nor will, but merely judgment.” (1788, p. 260) Framer Alexander Hamilton wrote that the judicial branch’s responsibility is to interpret the law based on the Constitution to maintain the balance of power between the branches of government. Still, contentions arise on whether the Court should take a literalist approach to the text, or adopt a Living Constitution that enables adaptability to contemporary societal needs. The judiciary should abide by a loose interpretation of the Constitution to enumerate broad Constitutional values and rights, while granting the people the capability to expand upon how to execute such principles in the appropriate context. The Court’s main obligation is to maintain allegiance to the basic tenets of the Constitution. In Federalist
It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning” (1788, p. 262). He establishes the judicial branch’s duty to use the Constitution to determine whether actions taken by other branches are consistent with it. However, former Associate Supreme Court Justice, Stephen Breyer, argues that the Constitution should only provide a “framework” with five general objectives for the U.S. government to uphold, rather than a literal set of specific rules. He asserts that the role of the Court “pays greater attention” to the affirmation of one “participatory democratic self-government” (2002, p. 289). His assertion conveys that judicial rulings need not adhere to the literal text of the Constitution. Interpreting the document exactly by its word would hinder the people of this fundamental principle of participatory democratic self-government, as their rights and freedoms would be reduced not of their own will, but to the specific wills of the Framers in a bygone era. Justices are the bulwarks of Constitutional values, rather than the explicit words of the