Judicial Review Of Alexander Hamilton

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 Federalists Papers were written in the eighteenth century by James Madison, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay in an effort to persuade New Yorkers to ratify the new U.S. Constitution. These papers are said to be the key that unlocks the true interpretation and meaning of the Unites Sates Constitution. One of the controversial topics relating to the Constitution that the Federalists Papers help to straighten out, is the practice of judicial review by the Supreme Court. In this essay, I will point out many of the examples Alexander Hamilton gives in Federalist No. 78 that support the idea of the Supreme Court having power of judicial review over all levels of

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).

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.

The Articles of Confederation had a weak central government. Alexander Hamilton believed that the more powerful state governments would take over. In Federalist Paper 16, he states that the death of the confederacy would be the result of the lack of a large national defense. Hamilton says the government should have control over the individual as well as the states so that the government can protect the “hopes and fears” of the individuals. Government is important to the unity of its country, and Hamilton claims that no government can always avoid or control those who will be disorderly, but it would be “vain to hope to guard against events too mighty for human foresight or precaution, and it would be idle to object to a government because it

Prior to the Constitution’s ratification, an ongoing debate over the danger of the federal judiciary took place between Robert Yates and Alexander Hamilton, who had very different views.

The life of every American citizen, whether they realize it or not, is influenced by one entity--the United States Supreme Court. This part of government ensures that the freedoms of the American people are protected by checking the laws that are passed by Congress and the actions taken by the President. While the judicial branch may have developed later than its counterparts, many of the powers the Supreme Court exercises required years of deliberation to perfect. In the early years of the Supreme Court, one man’s judgement influenced the powers of the court systems for years to come. John Marshall was the chief justice of the Supreme Court from 1801 to 1835, and as the only lasting Federalist influence in a newly Democratic-Republican

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

In order for one to understand American Constitutional law, one must first look to the Constitution; and therefore, look to the federal government established in the Constitution. The federal government is purposefully divided into three branches: the legislative branch that makes the laws, the judicial branch that interprets the laws, and the executive branch that puts the laws into effect. Article VI, Clause 2, sets up the Constitution as “the supreme Law of the Land;” and therefore, legislators, judges, and presidents must comply with the standards set in the Constitution. Judges, then, have the function to interpret what the Constitution means and have the responsibility to ensure laws adhere to the Constitution. Thereby, the

April 13, 1743 Albemarle County in the English colony of Virginia was the start of an American historical giant. Thomas Jefferson was born in affluence to his father, Peter Jefferson, a rising young planter in the Virginia colony, and his mother, Jane Randolph, who held a high status within the colony as well. Due to his father’s prosperity Jefferson was afforded the absolute best in the ways of education, starting with private tutors at the age of five, then moving on to learn how to read Greek and Roman in there original text and finally taking his studies to the College of William and Mary in Williamsburg which he would say is “…what probably fixed the destinies of my life…” pg 5. On the other side of the spectrum, a few years later

The system of checks and balances represents the foundation for the American democracy as it ensures that no one branch of the American government can become too powerful. During the Jackson administration, an important ruling from the Supreme Court was released in the historic case of Worcester v. Georgia (1832). In this case, two missionaries were appealing their arrest for protesting the state of Georgia’s legal encroachment on Cherokee law and land (Tindall 344). Chief Justice John Marshall found that the Cherokee nation was “a distinct political community” (Marshall qtd. in Tindall 344) and therefore not subject to Georgia law. Marshall’s ordered that Worcester, one of the arrested missionaries, must be released from Georgia prison, however, Georgia refused to release him. President Jackson, who wanted to decrease the federal bureaucracy and emphasize state’s power, decided to not enforce the Supreme Court’s verdict by stating that “he had no authority to intervene in Georgia” (Tindall 345). This, of course, is untrue as the federal government represents the “supreme law of the land” as dictated by the US constitution (United States of America). Jackson, however, refuses to take this up this responsibility and neglects his constitutional rights and duties and

Alexander Hamilton’s essay is mainly about the importance of having an independent judiciary branch and its ability to strike down laws passed by Congress which are believed to be “contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution.” The rest of the essay, for the most part, deals with structure of federal courts, their jurisdiction and powers, the methods used in appointing judges and other related issues.

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.

There are many checks and balances put into place by The Constitution, but one extremely important check was not in effect until after Marbury vs. Madison in 1803. This is the power given to the Supreme Court by Chief Justice John Marshall to declare laws made by Congress unconstitutional (“John Marshall”, 2016). This check was deemed necessary by the vague eighteenth clause in Article One, Section Eight of The Constitution giving Congress the power to “make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.” The intention of this paper is to define what this clause means

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.