Supremacy Judicial Review : The Power Of The Other Branches 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 concept of power is a divisive matter in the American political system, as the actors holding it are sometimes unable to impose it as a result of their limited authority to do so. The legislative, executive, and judicial branches in the national government depend on each-others point of view. Part of the Constitution was designed with the purpose of making it impossible for either of these three to become more powerful than the others. Each of them has the ability to check and balance the way that the other two function. In spite of the fact that this system was created with the intention of preventing power from being shared unequally in the country, it sometimes serves as a tool for political gridlock, considering that the judicial branches can debate in regard to a particular topic for unlimited amounts of time before actually reaching a conclusion regarding the respective issue.

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?

Have you ever wondered which branch of government was the most powerful? There are three branches of government but not all of them have the same power. Well if you didn't know the most important branch is the judicial branch. Even though all the branches are powerful,but at different times, The judicial branch has the final say in the use of power because it can overturn rulings by other judges ,they Can rule that an presidential action or law is unconstitutional , and the supreme court cannot be fired by the president.

With the young nation of America entered into the 19th century, there were still major issues when it came to the balance of powers of the different government branches. The status of judicial review in the Supreme Court was never pressed upon or given any real structure to. The power of judicial review had appeared many times in history before the set up of the Supreme Court as, in England, Chief Justice of the Common Pleas Sir Edward Coke made the originated the idea . During the ruling of the case of Dr. Bonham’s Case, Coke found that the London College of Physicians had no right to levy fines against anyone who violated their rules. He would later go on to state that, “no person should be a judge in his own case” (Fletcher 12). The act was revolutionary at the time as it set the notion of that an official body of government was needed to give fair governess to the people. The idea would pop up once in a while in events such as the Constitutional Convention where records that were kept by the textbook University of Chicago Law Review saw that “13 out of the 15 delegates made statements that were in support of the idea of judicial review” (Prakash 123). The interesting part about the quote is that it states that the idea of judicial review was in place in America many years before the actually case of Marbury v. Madison. Even in the Federalist Papers No. 78 which was published in May 28, 1788, by Alexander Hamilton, went into lengthy discussion about judicial review. In

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.

Federalism has played a large role in our government since the time that the Constitution was ratified. It originally gave the majority of the power to the states. As time went on, the national government gained more and more power. It used the "necessary and proper" clause of the Constitution to validate its acts, and the Supreme Court made decisions that strengthened the national government creating a more unified United States. Finally, the recent course of federalism has been to give powers back to the states.

The American concept of democracy provides that no branch of government shall be more powerful and uncontrolled than the other branches (Lutzenberger, 2012). Judicial review is the power of the courts to oversee and prevent the legislative and executive branches from becoming abusive. Through this power, the courts interpret the meaning of laws and their application. They can invalidate a law, which they deem inconsistent with the US Constitution. They can also change the application of the law when interpreting it. Although the Constitution does not explicitly mention this power, the courts infer it from the provisions on the judicial branch in the Constitution. This inference was first made in 1803 in the Marbury v Madison case. The court declared the existence of the power and that it was for the exclusive use of the courts. They use it to interpret the intents of the Constitution on legal issues submitted to them for decision (Lutzenberger).

Federalist 51 mentions that “the legislative authority necessarily predominates. The remedy for the inconveniency is to divide the legislature into different branches.” Keeping this idea in mind, it is the reason why the legislative branch is divided into the House of Representatives and the Senate. By dividing the legislative branch, Congress assures that too many individuals do not control one large portion of the government and that the legislative branch works with more efficiency without too many conflicting opinions. Additionally, in the Judiciary branch, the author explains that “some deviations [from absolute democracy] must be admitted.” The exception is necessary because according the Hamilton or Madison, the branch needs specific qualifications in order to elect essential members and that the position must be permanent so that it combat all dependence on authority. This concept sets up the process by which Supreme Court justices are put into power today where the president appoints a judge to serve for life or until the judge chooses to retire. Moreover, the article proposes the design that the overall government itself should be split into two sections, the federal and state level. This so that the state government can adhere to the values of its individual populations while the federal government lays down the general guidelines so that the state government’s values does not exploit the citizen’s natural

Together with, the Constitution of the United States likewise designed a strong government by establishing a national court system. This helped the government become more secure by having equal justice under law for every citizen including the president. In the document Powers of the Federal it presents the judicial powers and the supreme court. It states, “this branch interprets and ruled the actions of the other branches” (Document 2). This shows that the judicial branch has the ability to run each case according to the law it violated, without the influence of outside factors. Founding a national court system preserved and interpreted the law. Also, this demonstrates that having a court system help the government by equivalent laws enforce

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.

This document indicates how the value and the role of the Supreme Court revolved over the course of American history. The idea of separation power and three branches of government wasn’t as clear as it is today. In fact, when the United States was first established, during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787, no one was clear on to what extend should the judicial power be

According to James Madison in the Federalist Paper number fifty-one, Madison states that each branch should be able to check on the other branches (Doc. C). Basically, Madison is saying that branches check on each other to make sure no branch overpowers the other. The House can impeach the President, the President can appoint members of the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court can declare laws unconstitutional. Even if the President appoints members of the Supreme Court that are in the same political party as him, like our current President Donald Trump filled up the Supreme Court with Republicans, the other branches check on each other to make sure they have all the same amount of power. Thus, the framers of the Constitution guard us against tyranny by giving each branch a fair opportunity to stop the other branches from doing anything

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.

The judicial branch carries the most power because they have the ability to settle disagreements surrounding the meaning of law.The judicial branch takes power and has the ability to rectify disagreements enclosing the meaning of law.’’Decide if laws or actions by the president are constitutional’’