Preview

Can the power of the Supreme Court be j

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1511 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Can the power of the Supreme Court be j
Can the power of the Supreme Court be justified in a democracy? (25 mark)
The Supreme Court is the only branch of government which is unelected and therefore unaccountable, but appoints members for life. These characteristics have been criticised for being out of place in a democratic country such as the United States; especially due to the power the Supreme Court has, such as the power of judicial review. However while it could be argued to have too much power, in a liberal democracy such as America it is necessary for the Supreme Court to function this way. Overall the power of the Supreme Court can be justified in a democracy.
The Supreme Court’s most important power is its power of judicial review; which is the principle by which courts can declare acts of either the executive branch or the legislative branch unconstitutional. When looking at the scope of influence that the court has had over many constitutional, social and policy-related issues, it is important to remember that this power is self-given and that the court has not derived this power from another branch or from the electorate. In the case of Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice John Marshall established the power of the court to declare acts of Congress, actions of the president or any member of the federal executive, as well as legislation and actions of the state governments, unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has exercised this power, for example, to revoke state laws that denied civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution, which happened in Brown vs the Board of Education. However, this power also gives them the ability to rule bills which elected bodies, such as the Congress and the President, have pushed for to be unconstitutional. Keeping in mind that the Constitution does not include the power of judicial review for the Court, it can therefore be argued that the Founding Fathers did not specify this power for a reason, and in reality the Supreme Court has over stepped its mark.
Another

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison (1803) changed the role of the Supreme Court forever. The case started as a conflict of delivering court commissions, but ended as a precedent for the Supreme Court. During the case Marshall ruled that Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789—authorizing the Supreme Court to issue writs to government officials—was unconstitutional. This began the practice declaring laws that…

    • 433 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    5. Marbury v. Madison: In this 1803 case, Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional because Congress had overstepped its bounds in granting the Supreme Court the power to issue a writ of mandamus (an ultimatum from the court) to any officer of the United States. This ruling established the principle of judicial review. Marbury's pay was cut.…

    • 592 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marshall’s ruling for Marbury v Madison was one of the most controversial decisions to ever be handed down from the Supreme Court. The landmark decision ultimately made the Judicial branch the most powerful branch because of the judicial review. With judicial review the Supreme Court has the ability to interpret the Constitution or any law any way that the court sees fit accordance to the law. Marshall’s ruling was clear and concise. Marbury did have the right to his appoint under law. Marbury had the right to seek a remedy because he deemed himself injured but the Supreme Court could not issue the writ because it was not of original jurisdiction. If Marbury was to have went through a lower level court, the court would have issued the writ and taken his appointment as the chief justice of…

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nfib vs. Sebelius

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages

    When Chief Justice Marshall first established the important principle of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison, his goal was to give the judicial branch a safeguard by expanding the Court’s power and legitimizing the weakest branch of government. As Hamilton pointed out in Federalist 78, the judicial branch “will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution” because it “has no influence over the either the sword or the purse, no direction of either the strength or the wealth of society, and can take no action whatsoever.” He says the Court does not have “FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment, and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm for the efficacy of its judgments” (Fed. 78). The Court has the authority to say whether a law is constitutional, and Marshall gives himself that final authority without addressing enforcement, because the power to enforce belongs to the executive. The Court simply writes the opinion.…

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    One of the primary foundations for the power which it exercises over the American judicial system is the basics of judicial review. This power consists of the ability of the Supreme Court to decide upon “review” that a piece of some form of Government action is not permitted under the Constitution and can be deemed “unconstitutional”. The Supreme Court established this idea early in its existence and was empowered as a vital institution in the American Government primarily by exercising it. Judicial review is controversial because an unelected group is charged with interpreting the Constitution and the validity of laws affecting the population. Judicial review should be void of all political favoring, however, the power granted to a body that is not accountable to the public can be seen as an imbalance in the checks and balances intended by the three branch system of democracy in the United States.…

    • 473 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Best Essays

    The Supreme Court receives its powers from Article III of the Constitution. Article III states that “the judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and un such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.” (The Supreme Court in the American System of Government) According to this, the Supreme Court of the United States was admitted by the authority of the Judiciary Act of 1789. The Supreme Court has the power to revenue court cases whether they need to be amended or dismissed. The Supreme Court can overrule many jurisdiction actions due to the establishment with the power of judicial review. “The Supreme Court has jurisdiction over cases relating to the Constitution, federal laws, and treaties involving the United States.” (U.S. Supreme Court) This essentially means that the Supreme Court has higher values and little limitations amongst cases. Whether they are different cases in worse situations the particular cases that are brought up to those higher courts, which in this case is the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has the overrule and power of many things dealt with cases, these are the basic ones that are appointed to them to amend and take action. An great example for a combination of all these disputes of a Supreme Court justice are two court cases that are Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and Gideon v. Wainwright (1963). These cases cased a controversial expressed view with some constitutional scholars believing that the Court’s role is limited to interpreting policy that argues in favor of judicial activism and judicial restraint, by the order of Chief Earl Warren.…

    • 2357 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Best Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Sutherland, M. (2005). Judicial Tyranny: The New Kings of America. St. Louis, MO: The National Policy Center. ISBN: 9780975345566…

    • 1559 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Since the Constitution is complex, the Supreme Court is provided with the power to interpret the law and cases brought forth by lower courts. [4] All of the other courts must follow the ruling of the Supreme Court because the Constitution provides it with the power of deciding whether or not state, federal, and local governments are acting within the law. While judicial review is not noted in the Constitution, Madison had intended the U.S. Constitution to be reviewed by independent judges instead of through conflicting political bargaining; although, the Supremes Court’s power of Judicial review was not implemented until 1803 in connection with the case Marbury v. Madison.…

    • 839 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    "Apparently a great many people have forgotten that the framers of our Constitution went to such great effort to create an independent judicial branch that would not be subject to retaliation by either the executive branch or the legislative branch because of some decision made by those judges."said by Sandra Day O'Connor, former associate justice of the supreme court. The judicial branch translates the importance of laws, applies laws to induvial cases, and chooses if laws disregard the constitution. This legal branch is involved the supreme court and other government courts. Even though people argue that the judicial branch has too much power, the Supreme Court should still have the ability to declare laws passed by congress unconstitutional…

    • 1058 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison:(1803) Judicial review In 1801, Justice William Marbury was to have received a commission from President Adams, but Secretary of State James Madison refused to issue the commission. Chief Justice Marshall stated that the Judiciary Act of 1789, which was the basis for Marbury's claim, conflicted with Article III of the Constitution. Marbury did not receive the commission. This case determined that the Supreme Court and not the states would have the ultimate word on whether an issue was in violation of the Constitution. The ruling, based on judicial review, made the Judicial Branch equal to the other two branches of government.…

    • 2027 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Written by Chief Justice John Marshall, the majority ruled that while Marbury was entitled to receive his commission and that courts are able to grant remedies, the Supreme Court did not have the right to grant the plaintiff his legal order. The reasoning behind this was that Marbury’s request was based on a law passed by Congress that the Court deemed unconstitutional (Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789). The Court then stated that when the Constitution and the law conflict, it is the Supreme Court’s duty to uphold the law of the land and rule in unity with the Constitution.…

    • 580 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Marbury v. Madison was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. The decision helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the American form of…

    • 699 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Marbury V. Madison

    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Marbury v. Madison is viewed as the most important case in the U.S. Supreme Court history. The important constitutional principle that was established by U.S. Supreme Court, was to use the idea of “Judicial Review”, which is the power of federal courts to void acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution. Under Justice Marshall, the court began its ascent as equal in power to the congress and president. Jefferson as the new president, did not want appointees from the opposing party taking the new appointments in office. Therefore, he told James Madison not to deliver the commissions to seventeen of the appointees which were appointed by outgoing President Adams. One of the appointees was William Marbury, who did not receive his commission…

    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Taking place in 1803, Marbury v. Madison was the landmark case that set the standard of judicial review into effect. This means that any previous ruling on a case can be used as a precedent and can determine the verdict. The background of this case is all sorts of messy; when John Adams’ term was near its end, William Marbury and a few others were appointed as “justices of peace” for the District of Columbia, however their positions were never official. When Thomas Jefferson came into office, he told James Madison, the Secretary of State at the time, to deny Marshall and the others’ commissions, so Marbury and the others then sued Madison. John Marshall ruled in favor of Marbury however could not deliver his commission because the constitution conflicted with a legislative act known as the Judiciary Act of 1789. This case was significant because it served as the basis for Article III of the Constitution that sets the standards…

    • 529 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The article Marbury v. Madison and the Establishment of Judicial Autonomy by William E. Nelson, discusses “. . . a balance between two concepts democracy . . . and the rule of law. . .” (Nelson 240). The court case Marbury v. Madison took place in 1803. This court case is famous for the creation of judicial review; “the doctrine allowing courts to hold acts of Congress unconstitutional” (Nelson 240). During the presidency of Adam, sixteen circuit judges were appointed. Adams secretary of state at this time was Marshall, whom could not “deliver the commission for one of the new justices of the peace . . . William Marbury, before the end of President Adams’s term . . .” (248). Marbury v. Madison was started because Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state James Madison refused to give William Marbury as well as others their commissions. Because of this act by Madison, Marbury as well as others decided to petition for a writ of mandamus for their commissions. According to Cornell Law School, a writ of mandamus is “an order from a court to an inferior government official ordering the government official to properly fulfill their official duties or correct an abuse of discretion”. The case of Marbury v Madison led to the Judiciary Act of 1801. This…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays