Federal Judiciary Act Of 1789 Analysis

Founders of the United States of America believed in providing the people of this great nation with a fair, and impartial judicial system. The basic rights of the people, which are listed in the Bill of Rights, needed to be respected and protected by the government. Abraham Lincoln once said “Government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth”. Every part of the United States government has a duty to protect the people that gave the government power, and one organization in particular plays a very large role in this charge. The Judicial System of the United States America is a complex organization constructed to uphold the authority of the Constitution, and federal law. The judges within the

In America’s time there have been many great men who have spent their lives creating this great country. Men such as George Washington, John Adams, and Thomas Jefferson fit these roles. They are deemed America’s “founding fathers” and laid the support for the most powerful country in history. However, one more man deserves his name to be etched into this list. His name was John Marshall, who decided case after case during his role as Chief Justice that has left an everlasting mark on today’s judiciary, and even society itself. Through Cases such as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and McCulloch v. Maryland (1819) he established the Judicial Branch as an independent power. One case in particular, named Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), displayed his

In 1789, each of the thirteen states had already establish a judicial system such as criminal and civil cases. The United States Constitution is the original document in which it established fundamental laws for the national government as well as protecting the right of the citizens. The U.S Constitution was designed to avoid too much power in the system of checks and balances. As years went by, the Constitution began to adapt to the modern changes. Subsequently, the judicial system began to full fill the U.S Constitution’s purpose. Both Federal and State have their own jurisdiction and functions as stated in the Constitution. However, in recent years the judicial system has been broken due to lack of structure in law on the book and law in action.

The purpose of this chapter is to describe the policy-making role of the federal judiciary, in particular that of the Supreme Court. To appreciate the significance of this role, students need basic knowledge about the history of the Supreme Court, the structure and procedures of the federal courts, the nature of controversy over the courts, and the restraints on judicial policy making. After reading and reviewing the material in this chapter, you should be able to do each of the following:

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 U.S. Constitution’s framers had experienced the consequences of too much and too little government, so they deliberately designed a governing structure which allowed for an effective, but not overpowering, democracy. Though they most clearly delineated their vision for the executive and legislative branches, they smartly designed the judicial branch as a more fluid entity, which, according to Dr. Forrest McDonald, was principally designed to limit Congress’s power. The judicial branch’s authority to declare laws unconstitutional, as demonstrated in the 2003 Supreme Court case United

establish” (Criminal Courts, 94). While the supreme court has the highest power in the country, it

The Judiciary Act of 1789 was needed to maintain the balance of the state interests, and cental government. The level of complexity was remarkable, both by the standards of the time and by today's standards, as it allowed the interests of both the Federalist and anti-Federalist

The wise Thomas Jefferson concluded this: “At the establishment of our Constitution, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous;... these decisions… become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the Constitution….” In a continuation of the perversion of the court began by Chief Justice John Marshall in Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court of the United States continues to erode the people’s right to govern themselves, thereby usurping the democracy.

Spaeth (1991) speak about the basis in which the Supreme Court was built upon and its importance, and how the power was divided within the government from the Constitution’s creators. In their article “Judicial power and authority,” Edward Conrad Smith and Harold J. Spaeth (1991) speak about the basis in which the Supreme Court was built upon and its importance, and how the power was divided within the government from the Constitution’s creators. This supports the realization that Presidents do not get away with everything, and that the Supreme Court will strike down anybody and

Before I begin, let me make a declaration of modesty. I am, by no account, a legal expert, and, at this point, having a career as illustrious and fruitful as President Garrett’s is a mere dream. She is, of course, far more intelligent, informed, and experienced than I in matters relating to law and, in particular, the Supreme Court of the United States, and it is for this reason that I write this article not in criticism, but in genuine confusion.

For one to understand the authoritative changes made in the adoption of a more legislative like Court, it is necessary to first have some knowledge of the initial intent, and authority granted to it in the Constitution. Out of the three branches, Article three which addresses the Supreme Court has the shortest and most explicit passage in the Constitution. While section one simply gives the

Acclaim for asserting the United States Supreme Court as a substantial participant in the American structure of government has been ascribed to the guidance of John Marshall as Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835. By 1835, the Supreme Court had attained a level of equality with the prowess and prestige as that of Congress and the Executive that was not present before John Marshall was appointed to the position. Central to this development was the Court 's adoption of the Constitution as its distinct reserve. Chief Justice John Marshall utilized judicial review to eliminate the Supreme Court from the socio-political conflicts in government and to institute the rule of law based on the principles established in the Constitution of the Unites States. Marshall and his colleagues erected the Court 's recognized power by effectively affirming an assertion to explain the Constitution and subsequently supplant the Constitution as supreme law in the commonplace sequence of arbitration and by the end of his judgeship firmly supplanted the Supreme Court’s role in the U.S. system of government.

Article III of the Constitution of the United States vests judicial power in “one supreme Court”. With incredible adaptability, the Constitution has stood the test of time. Largely due to the limited specificity as to the application of its words, the Constitution has allowed the character of the Court to be historically defined by the individuals who have held the position of “Chief Justice of the United States”. The ideology and individual Constitutional interpretation of each Chief Justice has changed both the influential power and message of the Court. Earl Warren, Warren Burger, and John G. Roberts, Jr. have all successfully been appointed to the Court as Chief Justices. And although the Constitutionally proscribed process of

How did the Supreme Court and Chief Justice John Marshall establish the principle of “judicial review?” Explain the doctrine and its genesis and discuss two major Supreme Court cases since 2000 that have reinforced judicial authority over the States using this principle.