Alexander Hamilton's Reflection Of The Judicial Branch Of Government

The Judicial Branch is the balancing factor of the Government. It is the listener of the people of the US and it decides on all matters regarding the people. It "interprets the nation's law" (World Book 141). Being able to interpret the law gives the Judicial branch a special kind of power. One of which the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch do not possess. The Judicial branch decides when a law has been broken, to what extent, and how to punish the criminal act. And that is what makes it the strongest branch.

In your educated opinion, is the Judiciary really the weakest branch of government? Explain your answer. Has the Court gained or lost power over time? How would Hamilton respond to your argument?

The next paragraph that Hamilton wrote defined what the judiciary system is about. He first explains the roles of the Executive and legislature saying “the Executive not only dispenses the honors, but holds the sword of the community” and “the legislature not only commands the purse, but prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated.” Directly following these statements, Hamilton described the judiciary by writing, “the judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments.” Hamilton wrote that the judiciary’s job was “merely judgment.” The judiciary has the power of judgment over the different levels of government, including state governments. It has the power to judge whether the laws made by these governments are constitutional or the antithesis.

Two competing political philosophies have always existed throughout the United States’ relatively short history: one seeking to increase the power of the central government, and one seeking to decrease it. During the 1800s these two conflicting philosophies were acted out by the Federalist and the Democratic Republican parties, respectively. The Federalists, led by Alexander Hamilton, advocated the importance of a strong central government in leading the country forward, while the Democratic Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson, promoted increasing the common man’s role in government. Although both political parties had good intentions for the future of the United States, the Federalist Party was much more effective at uniting the American

The United States government consists of three main branches: the legislative, the executive, and the judicial. Within the contents of this essay, the judicial branch will be examined. The judicial branch of the United States government oversees justice throughout the country by expounding and applying laws by means of a court system.1 This system functions by hearing and determining the legality of such cases.2 Sitting at the top of the United States court system is the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of the United States encompasses the federal judiciary, explicitly the judicial branch. This court is comprised of life-long serving Justices who are selected by the President of the United States and approved by the Senate.3 Cooperatively,

The Articles of Confederation had a weak central government. Alexander Hamilton believed that the more powerful state governments would take over. In Federalist Paper 16, he states that the death of the confederacy would be the result of the lack of a large national defense. Hamilton says the government should have control over the individual as well as the states so that the government can protect the “hopes and fears” of the individuals. Government is important to the unity of its country, and Hamilton claims that no government can always avoid or control those who will be disorderly, but it would be “vain to hope to guard against events too mighty for human foresight or precaution, and it would be idle to object to a government because it

Prior to the Constitution’s ratification, an ongoing debate over the danger of the federal judiciary took place between Robert Yates and Alexander Hamilton, who had very different views.

In the beginning, The Articles of Confederation ruined all sense of a strong central government in the Colonies. The Articles of Confederation gave power to the states to govern themselves, and as we later learned, the idea to give power to the states to govern themselves individually was a very weak idea. Most people who didn’t own land, also known as freeloaders, didn’t have much or any say at all in the government. We needed change, and we needed it quickly. This is where, Alexander Hamilton, comes into play. Not only did he understand that a strong central government was crucial for a nation to succeed, but he had also understood that speaking out about his beliefs were just as important. His assertive and outgoing personality about his beliefs consequently helped him play a key role in the early form of the government.

In Federalist Paper number 78, Alexander Hamilton addresses the importance of an independent judicial branch and judicial review. The Constitution proposes the federal judges hold their office for life, Hamilton says by serving for life it decreases the chance of political pressure

April 13, 1743 Albemarle County in the English colony of Virginia was the start of an American historical giant. Thomas Jefferson was born in affluence to his father, Peter Jefferson, a rising young planter in the Virginia colony, and his mother, Jane Randolph, who held a high status within the colony as well. Due to his father’s prosperity Jefferson was afforded the absolute best in the ways of education, starting with private tutors at the age of five, then moving on to learn how to read Greek and Roman in there original text and finally taking his studies to the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg which he would say is “…what probably fixed the destinies of my life…” pg 5. On the other side of the spectrum, a few years later

Whose side would you have been on in the 1790s, Thomas Jefferson’s or Alexander Hamilton’s? Both of these men served under George Washington in the first presidential cabinet, yet they had very different views of what government should be (Davis 86). My objective in this research essay is to inform the reader of why there was so much controversy between these two founding fathers, and to determine which side had the better views for our newly forming country.

One of Jefferson’s and Hamilton’s first disagreements began with the idea of a National Bank. Hamilton suggested that the government should create the Bank of the United States Jefferson protested because this was not allowed by the Constitution. Hamilton opposed the view of Jefferson and stated that the Constitution’s writers could not have predicted the need of a bank for the United States. Hamilton said that the right to create the Bank of the United States was stated in the “elastic” or the “necessary and proper” clause in which the Constitution gave the government the power to pass laws that were necessary for the welfare of the nation. “This dilemma revisits the ever lasting dispute between the “strict constructionists” (Jefferson) who believed in the strict interpretation of the Constitution by not going an inch beyond its clearly expressed provisions, and the “loose constructionists” (Hamilton) who wished to reason out all sorts of implications from what it said”. Just a few years later, under President Jefferson, the federal government of the United States

The argument between Federalists and Anti-Federalists might seem long gone to American citizens, but still their philosophical foundations shape the teams, scope and size of the battlefield. These philosophies go back to two lone men, Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson. Both fought aggressively for a government based on their ideas, and both did make portions of the now-standing American government. This essay will outline the political, social and economic philosophies of both men, how their philosophies influenced the government today, and a closing opinion.

Hamilton discusses the powers of the judiciary in the Federalist papers essay no 78. He asserts that the judicial arm of the government is the least likely to threaten liberty and property of the citizens. Part of this assertion was brought about by his conviction and beliefs, that the judiciary was the weakest branch of government. The constitution spells out three branches of government which are independent of each other and perform different roles to the benefit of citizens. This document also spells out the checks and balances that help in regulating the three branches. For the judiciary, however, its nature of the roles makes it weakest. It also means that the role that judiciary plays in ensuring justice is meted upon every individual in the country makes it the least arm of government that can threaten individuals’ political rights.

According to Scott (2008), the Constitution of America has undergone several translations within the history of America because they found it to be unclear. Whereas it appears discrepant that the unclear Constitution could be useful, the disagreement is the case (Robertson, 2005). Americans regard the Constitution to be helpful for the reason that it allows for diverseness of views. In the history of America, a variety of thoughts would develop with alarming and formidable support through various factions (Robertson, 2005). Today, the main political arguments are presented from the Republican group or Democratic group. During the early periods of the American government, arguments on politics were made by Thomas Jefferson