Compare And Contrast The Division Of Power Between The President And The Senate

In this essay, I will be writing about how the power relationship between the United States Congress and the presidency has changed during the past two hundred years. I will be talking about how the executive branch is more powerful than the legislative branch and how the changing relationship between Congress and the president affected American democracy in a good way.

The Role of the Senate and House of Representatives The Congress of the United States consists of the Senate and the House of Representatives which means the USA is bi-cambial. The Congress of the United States was created by Article I, Section 1, of the Constitution, adopted by the Constitutional Convention on September 17, 1787. The Senate is composed of 100 Members, 2 from each State, who are elected to serve for a term of 6 years.

There is an open seat in the supreme court. Since the death of justice Antonin Scalia in February 2016, President Barack Obama has attempted to appoint judge Merrick Garland to fill this vacancy. However, the currently Republican U.S. Senate has refused to act on the nomination. This is not the first time the Senate has disagreed with the president's choice of nominee. The Senate confirms just around eighty percent of the president's nominations. There is a strong rationale behind this two-tiered appointment system. Seats in the Supreme Court are extremely important positions to hold; the Supreme Court has the role of interpreting the text of the Constitution and using that interpretation

President Obama publicly disagreed with the decision but could not change it. The President decides on nominations who are then put under scrutiny while he receives the ‘advise and consent’ of the Senate judiciary committee. There is therefore a small democratic link however it is very weak. Once a Justice is appointed they cannot be removed and are independent of the other political bodies this can be evidenced by Eisenhower’s appointments, a Republican conservative who appointed 2 liberal justices, something he regretted so much so that when asked if there were any regrets after his time in office he replied “I have made two mistakes, and they are both sitting on the Supreme Court”. As stated before the judiciary is independent and once Supreme Justices are appointed they cannot be fired or dismissed this leaves a huge deficit of accountability, a key factor of democracy.

Beforehand, I had just viewed the Supreme Court has a high up court system that did things the way that they did simply because they were the Supreme Court and could do things their way. However, I was very unaware as to the corruption and how out of control things have become over recent years. While the Supreme Court is a high up court, everything should still be decided with the people’s will as the main factor, unfortunately, that is no longer the case. Having power does not grant one the ability to appear as superior to the Constitution and its original intentions. Of course, the original founders did not have the intention for the Supreme Court to end up with the amount of distorted power that it has today.

It has been more than a few months since Justice Antonin Scalia had passed away and the president needed to replace him. In March of 2016, President Obama nominated Merrick Garland and since then Garland has been visiting with senators at Capitol Hill, where he has been submitting the questionnaires and customary disclosure, and preparing for a hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee (Ulrich). The Senate Judiciary Committee generally examines nominees for the position of the Supreme Court Justice.

The Supreme Court should not have any additional powers to allow them to enforce their rulings. The Constitution was made to ensure that everyone has certain rights and how they should follow them. If the Supreme Court was only given a certain amount of power then they should not go against what was already decided. The president has every right to make the decisions because he is doing it for the best of the country. If the president does make a mistake then congress can use checks and balances to ensure that the power maintained is correct and equal. The Supreme Court should not receive additional

The Supreme Court plays an important role in our government today. The courts perform several actions, such as making the final decision for many government policies. They interpret laws created by other government branches, and they make important policymaking decisions in order to please the public and make America a better place. The Supreme Court is pressured to make better decisions because they have an influence and a lot of power (. Even when they make mistakes, however, they do their best to make America a better place by using all of its powers given to them by the Constitution. These powers given to the Supreme Court allows them to perform several different actions without interference from other government branches. As a result,

The President has the authority from the US Constitution, Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2, to choose new US Supreme Court Justices when the position becomes vacant. Barak Obama now has this opportunity presented before him. With the unfortunate passing of Justice Antonin Scalia, the President must get a list of candidates from the White Houses’ Counsel Office and figure out who is the best candidate for the prestigious position. The Senate then has the obligation given to them in the Constitution, Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2, to either confirm or deny the President’s choice for the Supreme Court. This has become a very important topic in this year’s election. This turn of events has the ability to change the power structure of the Supreme Court from Republican run to a Democratic run Court. This could change many laws in the US.

The Supreme Court plays a critical role in defining the law of the land. Essentially, they are a set side political body that makes decisions based on moral correctness concerning the people. In the Dred Scott v. Sandford case however, we can overtly see that the Supreme Court’s ruling was immoral. This is concerning because Supreme Court justices do not face releelection. Likewise, their main purpose is to interpret the Constitution in a way that is representative of the people. The ruling of the Dred Scott v. Sandford case was unconstitutional because the justices acted based on their own personal beliefs rather than the reliance on the words of the Constitution, and popular opinion of the people.

With independence comes a new nation, a new nation means a new form of government, and a new form of government means new laws that have to be passed. This new form of government has never been done before by anyone which makes it unique.

The Constitution of the United States is a carefully thought and written document. It is designed to provide for a strong and flexible government, to meet the needs of the public, yet sufficiently limited and just to protect the rights of American citizens; it permits a balance between society's need for order and the individual's right to freedom. Article III of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary. The section states that "The judicial Power of the United States”, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in other inferior courts as established by the Congress. Although the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, Congress has the power to decide how to organize it, however the Supreme Court Justices decide the cases. There has been a recent controversy on whether or not Congress should hold the most power when it comes to interpreting the meaning of the

The President and members of the Senate are very much influenced by their party, which makes it unlikely that they would nominate or confirm someone for the Supreme Court who would go against their party’s agenda.

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.

In the US system of checks and balances, the Supreme Court is also very powerful. They are able to create a lot of trouble for the president if they want to, as they have the so-called power of judicial review. This means that they can declare any law or presidential act unconstitutional. The Supreme Court Justices are appointed for life, and the president has therefore no means of controlling them, unless they resign voluntarily or die. The balance between liberal and conservative justices here, is therefore of course subject to a lot of interest, and the president has good reasons in maintaining a harmonious relation to the Supreme Court.