Bibliography: Wassenberg American Politics Word Count: 817
Bibliography: Wassenberg American Politics Word Count: 817
The Framers of the United States Constitution vested immense power in the judicial branch of the government. Over the years, the highest Court of the land, the United States Supreme Court, has ruled on a multitude of cases, making new laws and setting precedence. The American people deem the judicial body supreme and, perhaps irrationally, trust they will interpret the Constitution more accurately and ethically compared to the executive and legislative branches. However, decisions of the courts are not purely legal, but rather a synthesis of attitudinal, legal, and strategic processes.…
“Its is emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial department, to say what the law is.” (Ducat, Craig Constitutional Interpretation p. 10) These seventeen words written two hundred years ago made the highest court in the United States supreme, and making it so, Chief Justice John Marshall’s words in that sentence continue to make an impact on every Supreme Court case thereafter. Justice Marshall laid the basic foundations to protect the Federal system that was established by the Constitution. In Marbury v. Madison, McCulloch v. Maryland, and Gibbons v. Ogden the Supreme Court maintained the United States as a federal state.…
Sutherland, M. (2005). Judicial Tyranny: The New Kings of America. St. Louis, MO: The National Policy Center. ISBN: 9780975345566…
Judicial Restraint and Judicial Activism in McDonald v. City of Chicago Judicial Restraint is when the Supreme Court restricts their powers to avoid making any changes to public policy, unless that policy is unconstitutional. When applying judicial restraint to cases, the courts stand by stare decisis (previous decisions of the court), uphold current law, and hold strictly to the text of the Constitution. They think that by only interpreting the constitution and not creating new laws, that they are preserving the laws that this country was founded on. Judicial activism is the opposite.…
Actions that are made by an individual that may seem like the best decision in their own eyes may not be the best decision to someone else or even a group of people, so is the same with the government. When the founding fathers drafted the constitution they realized that not one person or specific branch should hold all authority over any one decision, so they developed a system of checks and balances. This system serves as a mediator between branches of government so that each decision is made in the utmost confidence. Having been weighed, measured and determined the wisest decision, then it will be appointed and passed up the chain of command so to speak.…
The Brethren, co-authored by Bob Woodward and Scott Armstrong, is an in-depth documentary of the United States Supreme Court from 1969 to 1975, under the leadership of Warren Burger. The book attempts to present the reader with what "really" goes on in the Supreme Court. It describes the conferences, the personality of justices, and how justice's feel toward each other, items which are generally hidden from the public. This book is comparable to a lengthy newspaper article. Written more as a source of information than of entertainment, The Brethren is the brutal truth, but not boring. The storytelling is clearly slanted against the Burger court but the overall quality of the work makes…
The Judicial branch is one of the three branches of the federal government. This branch includes criminal and civil courts and helps interpret the United States constitution. At the constitutional convention of 1787 the birth of the judicial system was born and soon after became adopted to the future of the federal government judicial system. Because of this, the convention it went down in political history and showed the United States how organized and prepared the government was when it came to the court system. But despite the fact that the government was prepared there is a slight controversy that the Judicial branch happens to be the most powerful branch out of the three. What is your belief on the ability and capability of the judicial…
The Constitution was written in 1787 to establish a national government, divide powers, and gives the roles to the three branches. James Madison, one of the authors of the Constitution, decided along with many other leaders that it is best to have a framework of how the government should work so there would be order and avoid problems in the future. The legislative branch is in change of passing and making laws. The judicial branch is in charge of making sure that the country is being constitutional.. The executive branch is in charge of enforcing the laws.…
One of the major jobs for the federal judges is to protect the United States from the “tyranny of the majority”. Furthermore, even if the majority rules, the minority still has rights. Many components of the Bill of Rights, which the judges are called to enforce, are designed to protect the rights of the unpopular minorities. Being a Supreme Court judge is a difficult job, and even with life tenure, they are not completely immune from political pressure. They remain members of society; therefore it is difficult to allow things to happen even if they know it is morally wrong, but constitutionally…
The judiciary branch of the United States’ government is comprised of a system of courts, on both federal and state levels, which are used to bring justice to cases between citizens of the States. The power of judicial review gives the courts the authority “to review and, if necessary, declare actions of the legislative and executive branches invalid or unconstitutional” (Ginsberg). It’s interesting that the branch that works to uphold the laws of the U.S. Constitution is sometimes viewed as the “least dangerous branch” of our Government. Referring to writings such as Federalist 78 (by Alexander Hamilton) and Brutus 12 (by James Madison), clears up exactly what the judiciary was set up for, why it is important to have in our Government system, and how it might affect the other branches, the executive and legislative. It is clear while reading the works that the two writers have opposing views. Therefore, it is crucial to study both works and compare their ideas to our current Judiciary to understand how our country has undergone changes within the system.…
If our system of government and lawmaking has helped us progress so significantly in values, I can only believe that we will continue to fix injustices as we have in the past. We have moved beyond slavery and segregation. If justices are to interpret the Constitution to keep up with the times we will lose a very important aspect of our society. The Constitution gives us something that we all feel is real and constant. Being conservative on issues involving the bench does not mean that we are forwarding conservative legislations. The framers only wanted certain things to remain the same through all…
Hamilton argues in the federalist No. 78, which branches of government, specifically the judicial branch and how it’s the weakest branch of government. Hamilton believes that the Judicial branch only has the power to judge on laws, but does not alter the actual final decisions on what the laws people need to uphold. Hamilton recognizes that you need all three branches to make a successful government function and that the judicial branch is the least powerful of the three. The legislative branch makes the laws, executive branch enforces these laws and lastly the Judicial branch needs to understand the laws that are being put forth. Being the least dangerous branch of government it still has its checks and balances being able to hold one another to be accountable for each other, but also as a Judicial branch can keep the other branches in alignment.…
Although sometimes this is necessary in order for progression and a fair society. Inaction (restraint) may actually be only looking after the interests of Conservatives) Many Conservatives argue that the FF never intended the SC to yield so much power.They believe judges should have adjudicative role only.They believe policy decisions should only be made by democratically elected representatives of the people.They believe the prestige of the court system would be diminished by involvement in political decisions Stare Decisis (Let things be) precedent. Counter Can the US society function without people looking after the Constitution and reinterpreting it for the benefit of all Think Gay rights, rights of women, immigrants, Blacks. Times change social change happens opponents argue that restraint allows judges to passively accept values without question these are contrary to US societys values AA are not slaves anymore 14th Amendment needs to protect them too and so restraint has political significance because it allows Conservative and republican views to remain undisturbed this pleases the right wing, particularly the…
I believe that the judicial restraint philosophy is more appropriate for federal judges to follow because, unlike judicial activism, it does not allow judges to expand vague Constitutional principles to fit their own viewpoint and principles. Judicial restraint does not authorize judges to interpret Constitutional texts and laws (conservative or liberal interpretation) in order to serve their own principles, policies, and considered estimates of the vital needs of contemporary society. The judicial restraint policy also ensures that separation of powers is applied justly so that different branches of government do not intervene with the power of the other branch. Also, because the Stare Decisis has a huge impact on future decisions and precedent,…
The United States Government is broken down into three branches. Legislative, Executive, and Judicial. Think about it! The Legislative branch is grouped into Congress, The Senate, and The House of Representatives, this branch is responsible for writing laws. The Executive Branch contains the President of the United States, the Secretary of State, and the Attorney General. This branch is responsible for making the laws official. Also the Judicial Branch is the United States Supreme Court. This branch is in charge of addressing whether or whether not laws are constitutional, and whether or whether not they are permitted under constitution. In 1787, the United States Constitution was written to establish a set of principle rules on how they believed…