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.

The job of a supreme court justice is no easy task. They are given situations that others could not solve and must interpret the constitution in an unbiased way to see what the solution is. Interpreting the Constitution is especially difficult because its ratification was over 225 years ago. This means that the judges need to keep the constitution up to date, while also making sure not to lose the original purpose of each amendment. The constitution

The Supreme Court often oversteps its perceived legal sovereignty when using judicial review. Article III of the Constitution solely vests the courts the “judicial power of the United States” never mentioning the power of judicial review. The judiciary’s duty, according to the law of the land, is “to interpret the laws, not scan the authority of the lawgiver” (Gibson, J.). The judiciary has not followed a strict interpretation of the constitution; rather, it has encroached on the power of the legislative branch and the sanctity of the separation of powers. If the Constitution “were to come into collision with an act of the legislature” (Gibson, J.), the Constitution would take precedent, but it is

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 political cartoon analyzes the branches of government using football as a metaphor to show checks and balances that limit the power of the government. Furthermore, checks and balances work for the U.S. government because powers are delegated to each branch and the checks allow for equity among the branches. In the cartoon, the legislative branch and the executive branch are playing against each other while the judicial branch is the referee. In document one, Congress has the power to write laws, but the president can veto the bills that Congress proposes. Thus, the powers balance out the branches’ powers, which keeps them in a tight line of what they are allowed to do. Also, the President appoints judges, but Congress can reject them. They

Established in 1789, the Supreme Court was created to interpret the meaning of the Constitution and to use that interpretation to declare any actions of the Legislative or Executive Branches unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court was capable of also acquiring more functions as evidence of the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803). The case dealt with President John Adams appointing sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Colombia. Adams appointed these justices so that his political party would have more justices than the rival party. Problematically, the appointment letters were not delivered by the end of his term. By that basis, President Thomas Jefferson annulled the appointments because he retained the right to appoint the justices during his time of jurisdiction. Consequently, this aggravated the appointed justice and therefore one of the justices named William Marbury filed a case in the Supreme Court over the commissions that they were promised (Goldstone). The Court ruled that Marbury did have a right to commission and also with it made a statement that enacted the doctrine of Judicial Review. This meant that the court had the "right to review, and possibly nullify, laws and governmental acts that violate the constitution. Judicial Review is a means of assuring that politicians and various other leaders adhere to the constitution and do not use powers granted to them by

The Supreme Court's decisions under John Marshall's leadership at the time, did not extend federal power too much because his opinions were needed to resolve and unite the states. The amount of power he had at the time was appropriate for the situation. The Supreme Court has an important role in out American government though, to lay the final decision in few peoples hands is giving them way to much power. The Supreme Court has a significant amount of influence on many important legal issues for our country, why do we give that much authority to individuals who are appointed for life without being elected?

While our nation was founded on the principle of a balance of power, coming from the ideology of Baron de Montesquieu, the Judicial, unlike any other branch, does not have regular elections for its positions or terms like Presidency or Congress. Justices are nominated and confirmed for seats on the Supreme Court for life and have the option to leave whenever they choose to, not when they are voted out of office. An example of this is Justice Stanley F. Reed. He worked with the panels for the D.C. Circuit and

Our judicial branch is essential in the function of our current government and to make valid the constitutional rights of every citizen. In additional, the judicial branch has is established to make sure there is balance of power within the executive and the legislative branches. With this in mind and being a citizen of this country is important to know that the head of the judicial branch is a person that is well prepared and educated to make a rightful a judgement always. Correspondingly, is important to learn who the current Justices of the Supreme Court are and what are their qualifications. Recently, due to a given school assignment I was able to read more and learn more about our current Chief Justice of the United States and the Associate

Madison wrote that, as far as political powers and the branches of government were concerned, “ambition must be made to counteract ambition” (Principles and Practice of American Politics, Federalist 51, p. 72). Ambition certainly counteracts ambition within the Senate itself, as is demonstrated by polarization and compromise, but ambition also acts as a balancing force between the Congress and the Supreme Court. When the president nominates potential justices, it is the job of Congress to carry out hearings and approve (or disapprove) the candidate (The Logic of American Politics, p. 390). Congress also has the power to determine the number of justices on the Supreme Court, and it is their job to add spaces on the bench as they see fit (The Logic of American Politics, p. 371). One of the more important functions of the Supreme Court is judicial review, which gives the Supreme Court the power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional. Although this power is never explicitly stated in the Constitution, it is implied in Article III, and is mentioned in Federalist 78 (The Logic of American Politics, p. 361). Madison noted, “it is not possible to give each department an equal power of self defense. In republican government, the legislative authority necessarily predominates” (Principles and Practice of American Politics, Federalist 51, p. 73). The Judicial Branch was designated as the “weakest” branch from its beginning, and was created to concern itself with “neither force nor will, but merely judgment.” Judicial review serves as protection for the American people from the abuses of Congressional power (Principles and Practice of American Politics, Federalist 78, p. 416-417). Just as Congress and the Supreme Court balance each other through structure and representation, they each also balance the actions and decisions of the

The judicial branch plays many roles in interpreting the constitution and implementing public policy. As first order, the judicial branch has gain the powers, over the years, to declare laws passed by Congress unconstitutional and pledge them to be null and void. Judges from courts usually are strict constructionist, or they depend solely on personal ideology. If they do not base their court cases off of personal ideology, then they use previous cases which have occurred before. Judges try and find cases previous to those brought up and connect them in a special way. The connection allows them to have similar rulings. Doing so is called stare decisis. This ultimately allows them to refer back to old cases and their rulings, or establish a new

I agree with the statement that the federal courts act in an undemocratic manner. The decision in Marbury v. Madison is not really the issue, it was the Supreme Court granting itself the power of judicial review. In declaring Article XIII of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional the Supreme Court acted in contradiction to the Constitution by usurping the rights of the states and individuals as granted by the Tenth Amendment. The only way to return judicial review would be for the states or individuals to file suit in federal court to petition the Supreme Court to stop exercising judicial review. Unfortunately this case would end up before the Supreme Court making the entire process moot.

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.

I believe that the judicial branch has the most power because they have the power to settle disagreements about the meaning of laws and decide if laws and the president decides if laws or action.

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.