Argumentative Essay: The Power Of The Supreme Court

Although the Supreme Court is independent the players (nine justices) are appointed not only because of their experience and knowledge, but because of their political affiliations. However, this can only partly influence the strength and independents of the Court.

It takes time to reach the highest court in the country; currently the average Supreme Court justice age is nearly seventy years old. It is reasonable to think that biases may be hardened and unable to keep up with the popular opinion by this age. For example, take public approval of same-sex marriage, which in the six short years from 2009 to 2015 rose nearly twenty percent in the polls, bringing it to a 55% majority. How does a Supreme Court with a stagnant appointment system react to such a sudden sway in opinion? Apparently, surprisingly well. For whatever reason, the decisions of the Supreme Court seem to align with public opinion. For instance, in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, the supreme court reached a 5-4 majority in for same-sex marriage. Public opinion at the time was 55% in favor, and remarkably, the portion of justices in favor was within less than one percent of that value. Perhaps the Supreme Court acknowledges its role to interpret the Constitution through the eyes of the people, as Justice Kennedy describes. Or perhaps it is due to the powerful weight swing positions carry in the Supreme Court. Whatever the mechanism, the Supreme Court does a remarkable job of staying neck and neck with popular opinion.

The United States judicial branch to the general American public can seem insulated from politics, because of their adversarial system, that does not allow judges to choose their cases. The judicial branch unlike, their two counterparts, the legislative and executive at large rely on the respect of the American people and the heads of the two other branches. In appointing members of the federal judiciary, Presidents appoint members who resemble their political ideologies and their likelihood of confirmation in the Senate, the Senate confirms these members based on their performance on the litmus test and Senatorial courtesy. Courts, specifically the Supreme Court, make decisions based on the Constitution, but the legislative branch has the

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,

Nevertheless, some critics argue that the judidicary, some critics argue that the judiciary are the final arbiters of what is meant by the principle of separation of powers, which therefore provides the judiciary with subordinate levels of power. Moreover Chief Justice Hughes concluding that the ‘Constitution is what the judges say it is’ due to ability to interpret the constitution. In America, although Congress may new laws affecting courts, ultimately judges decide.

After gaining independence from Britain in 1776, the newly formed nation of the United States was afraid of creating another monarch to rule over them and was failing to survive under the Articles of Confederation. This fear and this downfall led to the Founding Fathers creating a new Constitution that included separation of powers. This means that the power of the federal government is divided into different branches. The Constitution lays out the functions of three different branches, the Legislative, the Executive, and the Judicial. The three branches were given the ability to enforce checks and balances in an attempt to ensure that all the branches had equal power.

If the U.S. Supreme Court has the power to declare laws null and void, should this power clearly be stated in the Constitution rather than implied?

Also commonly referred to as The Steel Seizure Case, it was a United States Supreme Court decision that limited the power of the President of the United States to seize private property in the absence of either specifically enumerated authority under Article Two of the US Constitution or statutory authority conferred on him by Congress. The Majority decision was that the President had no power to act except in those cases expressly or implicitly authorized by the Constitution or an act of Congress.

I discovered how the Supreme Court came to be. I believe that the Supreme Court is overlooked because they make a lot of important decisions. I think that is disappointing that not many people in our country know any names of the people of the Supreme Court. At first their were six member now their are nine. I learned that when the Supreme court first started, they each had a geographical zone. Today, all citizens now go to the Supreme Court. I am skeptical that the Constitution is silent about exactly what the Supreme court is, what it should do, and how should they do it. In the Constitution it mostly mentions the House of Representatives. I think that Supreme Court is barely mentioned because at first it was underestimated and it was not

While independence of the courts was a factor in achieving balance of power among the governmental branches, Hamilton additionally states that the judicial branch is the weakest and “least dangerous” branch unless, in its independence, it is able to act. “The judiciary... 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.... It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment.” The courts are thus enabled only by the executive branch to enforce decisions and are explicitly forbid to interpret laws founded on its views. With only the power to make judgments and no power to act, the judicial branch could not contribute to an equal balance of power among the three branches.

The US Supreme Court has a number of powers. These include the power to declare acts of Congress, the executive or state legislatures unconstitutional through the power of judicial review. The supreme court justices are also given the power to interpret the constitution when making decisions, again, through their power of judicial review. It is arguable that it is essential for the supreme court to have such powers in order to allow the American democracy to flourish. However, there is much evidence to suggest that the supreme court holds too much power for an unelected body, thus hindering democracy.

Supreme court (Judiciary)- During the federalist era the judiciary was considered as the weakest of the three branches with “no influence over either the sword or purse”.(Hamilton) But over a period of time the judiciary has strengthened its position as far as being a protector of constitutional rights. For example Marbury vs. Madison was a landmark case in which the judiciary defined a clear boundary between the executive and itself. It termed a law passed by government unconstitutional. Although it could not directly influence laws it’s judgment’s in the slavery case Dredd Scott vs. Sanford (1857) paved the way for the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments in the constitution written specifically to overturn the decision of giving people the right to own slaves.

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized (Fourth Amendment). The text of the Fourth Amendment does not define exactly what “unreasonable search” is. The framers of the constitution left the words “unreasonable search” open in order for the Supreme Court to interpret. Hence, by looking at

In 1789, the final draft of the constitution of the United States came into effect. In article three it calls for "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." In the article it neither says the duties, powers, or any organization of the supreme court. If left this up to congress and to the justices of the court itself for these details.

There is a proverb that says, “Don’t fix what isn’t broke.” This statement is very likely as true as it is old. But what happens when something is dysfunctional? The ‘something’ in question is the coveted seat of the Supreme Court Justice, which many should know is not a position that is obtained from the amazingly widespread routine of elections. Not to let out any spoilers if you were not aware, the President is the nominator of Justices to these associate positions and the Senate is the deciding group with a majority vote. I agree with the practice, currently instated because of our Constitution, but can see how some people worry over its effectiveness. There has been one case where a standing Supreme Court Justice has been impeached.