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 …show more content…
Ms. Greenhouse talks about the extensive experience the justices have and their ability to understand cases on a case-by-case basis. From her experience working at the Supreme Court she has seen how the justices perform and rule on cases such as those involving capital punishment. Greenhouse concludes that the court should not hold a position to decide against what the people want, such as in the case of creating laws against abortion, however her opinion is consistent with the belief that the court justices are in fact the more qualified interpreters of the Constitution. The majority of the public believes that the Constitution should be interpreted according to what it means in current times and the justices use discretion to do exactly this and apply fair rulings to cases that question the
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 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
A 3rd Article of the Constitution talks about the Judicial Branch. It says that there will be a court and then a “supreme” court that will make many decisions. It later says what kind of cases the federal government gets to hear. The framers wrote detailed descriptions for this Article so that the Judicial system new what cases they got and what cases the federal government got. Without the description, the federal government could possibly override the Supreme Court and get all of the cases. The framers also saw that this Article would need provisions because new cases would arise and new courts would come around.
The Third Article of the United States Constitution set up the Judicial Branch. Section One of the Article set up the Judicial Branch with “one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” It also stated that the judges in the Court can only hold office in good behavior with a compensation that is unchanging at anytime in the Court. During their time in office, that is. The Second Section of the Constitution brings to mention the fact that the power that the Judicial Branch has goes to anyone. All cases brought under the Constitution of the United States of America are seen in Court. It also talks about criminal cases having a trial by jury. This not including impeachment trials. The
In the Judicial Branch, the Supreme Court has the power to disregard the Constitution or listen and go along with the Constitution. The Supreme Court also has the power to do the opposite and decide which case goes with the law and ignore the Constitution. This document shows the powers between the Legislative and Judicial Branch. By the system of Checks and Balances between the Legislative and Judicial Branch, The Judicial Branch has the power to reject laws that are unconstitutional from the Legislative Branch. But in turn, the Legislative Branch has the power to approve appointments of Supreme Court Justices from the Judicial Branch. (Page 162 9.2, DBQ Document
In the Constitution, the Supreme Court is the overriding law of the land. The Supreme Court can overrule the decisions made by the likes of a state or appeals court. The Constitution is clear in its attempts to unify the nation and strengthen the federal government, all while maintaining the freedoms of the states and the feeling of equality. Though the Constitution is written in a vague way, leaving it to be open for interpretation and allowing it to conform with the changes that time brings to society. But because of the uncertainty of the document, it has often been misinterpreted, or has caused a wide array of viewpoints of a certain issues. The most memorable example being that of the Civil War, but today it is even more prevalent when we try to relate modern day issues to the ambiguous instructions left to us by our forefathers.
In this case, Chief Justice Roberts determines the role of the Court in his opinion. Roberts argues that the point of the Court is not to say whether a law is good or bad, if the people do not like the bill, it is their fault. Roberts says, “the responsibility of this Court is to enforce the limits on federal power by striking down the acts of Congress that transgress those limits” (Roberts, pg 6). He also says, “we must determine whether the Constitution grants Congress powers it now asserts, but which many States and individuals believe it does not possess” (Roberts, pg 2). To do so, the Court must examine the limits on the Government’s power and their own limited role in “policing those boundaries” (2). In this case, Roberts says the Court must uphold its constitutionality and the fundamental will of the people.
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
Every Supreme Case that has taken place within the United States Judicial System has revolved around one crucial theme: the interpretation of Constitutional text; the very reason why the Judicial Branch exists is to interpret the Constitution that was written centuries ago. More specifically, Schechter v. United States, Yakus v.United States, and Mistretta v. United States focused mainly on the constitutional doctrine of the non-delegation of legislative
On Febuary 24, 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall made a ruling that would shape the United States for the rest of its life. In the case it was Marbury v. Madison, they ruled in favor of Madison, because they believed that it was not in their jurisdiction. With that being said John Marshall created "Judicial Review" that gave the Supreme Court the power to decide if a law is un-constitutional. On the other hand Thomas Jefferson believed that if anybody had the right to determined what was un-constitutional or not it should belong in the hands of Congress. I believe congress has the right to decide what is constitutional because, the people elect the congress, all members of congress serves terms, and the congress has greater numbers then the
Constitution, and “appoints federal judges by advice and consent of the Senate” (SITE, p.). The judicial branch is comprised of the Federal, District, and Appeals Courts, which judge cases concerning federal law, but the Supreme Court decides if the law agrees with the U.S. Constitution. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080521155230AAz04SP
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.
When the United States Constitution was established, the founding fathers devised the core of the court system that is present in today’s society. The state and federal government each have a version of a Supreme Court which is typically led by a Chief Justice. The states level Supreme Court Justice governs the issues that pertains to the citizens within the respective state. These individuals will also take part in hearings or proceedings that impact of law of the state and hear constitutional cases with regards to the state. On the federal side, a Supreme Court Chief Justice will operates more on a national
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.
As a result of federalism, whereby government system of the United States has generated an overlap of power as a result of delegating some powers to the federal government and others to the state to exercise, there has therefore been a conflict in the undertaking of criminal justice in courts. Article six of the United States constitution contains a supremacy clause that pronounces the role of judges in every state as bound by the constitution (Banks, 34). This is however subject to different interpretation because when these laws interfere with the laws of the congress, the act of congress is deemed supreme even though the latter is in pursuance of the constitution, it must conform to the laws of congress. For instance, the United States district courts have jurisdiction to hear federal cases and deciding the constitutionality of federal laws. However the constitution gives powers to the congress to control and determine the cases to