Top-Rated Free Essay
Preview

Judicial Review

Better Essays
1654 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Judicial Review
In the 1825 case of Eakin v. Raub, Pennsylvania Justice John Bannister Gibson declared that the judicial branch of the government had no right to influence or control the actions of any other branch of the government. Thus, Justice Gibson declared the act of judicial review unconstitutional and in disagreement with the proper role of the judiciary as inherently defined by the constitution. The proper roles and powers of the judiciary branch of the government, as conveyed to it by the constitution, are subjects of controversy because they upset the balance in power with the other branches of the government. Upon expressing his verdict on judicial review, Justice Gibson intended to challenge the view of the judiciary as established by Justice John Marshall in 1801, in the case of Marbury v. Madison. Marshall affirmed that judicial review is the instrument by which the Supreme Court ensures the constitutionality of the acts issued by the legislature and defends the American population against abuses. Hence, the judicial branch is superior to any statute issued by the legislature and it operates by confirming the constitutionality of laws. While the latter has become the popular view of the judiciary, it contradicts with the true duty and power of the judiciary and establishes it as the supreme branch of the government. Furthermore, in his reasoning, Marshall fails to properly consider the legislature’s power and role. Not withstanding its popularity, it cannot be denied that Marshall’s deliverance on judicial review grants the judiciary superior political power over all other branches of the government and greatly exaggerates the role of the judiciary in relation to the legislature by favoring of judicial review. Conversely, Gibson discusses the unconstitutionality of judicial review by regarding the judiciary as a vassal of the legislature. The constitution, not the judicial branch, is the supreme and true law of the land that must prevail; the people grant sovereign power to the legislature by electing them. Although the judiciary branch is entitled to power and responsibility by the constitution and common law, it does not posses the degree of power over other branches that judicial review grants it. According to Gibson, political power is best defines as any degree of control or influence that may be exerted by a particular branch of the government over another (Kutler 32). However, the duties assigned to the judiciary require no need for political power. Judges are to apply previously established laws to particular cases. They are to judge whether particular actions by individual citizens defy the order in society as established by the laws issued by the legislature. Thus, judges are entitled with the interpretation of laws in society, a civil duty that involves nothing of a political nature. The judiciary’s concern is with the citizens and the distribution of justice in their behavior. Gibson affirms that such is the power of the judiciary as defined by common law. By this logic, judicial review is a political power wrongly invested to the Supreme Court because it acts against its civil duties and politically commands the actions of a separate branch of the government. Judicial review involves the act of passing judgment and, if necessary, annulling acts of the legislature. Upon defining the duty of the judiciary as civil, Gibson declares that the judiciary cannot possess political power for it is not required by its responsibilities. In an efficient government, each branch must specialize in those duties in which it possesses a unique ability, but judicial review would involve the judiciary in duties of the legislature. As each branch claims a role in the government, none is supreme for each relies on the superiority of the other two to properly function. By the constitution, the legislature is attributed power of legislation, thus creating laws according to constitutional standards. The duty of the legislative branch is to refer to the constitution in order to issue laws and regulations that are in accordance with it. Under the logic that each branch has superiority over its assigned duties, it would follow that the legislative has superior abilities over the judiciary and executive in creating constitutional laws. Upon acknowledging such superiority, the legislature claims the ability to assess its own actions according to constitutional standards. Hence, a properly functioning legislative branch will only issue laws that are consistent with the constitution. Moreover, it is the duty of the legislature to properly review its own actions and decide upon their constitutionality, it is endowed with the superior ability to do so. On the other hand, judicial review puts into question the superiority of the legislature to exert the power of legislation. Moreover, judicial review allows judges to operate outside of their assigned field and assume acts that correspond to the legislature. The judiciary exercises superiority in the interpretation of the laws issued by the legislature, and is thus concerned solely with the meaning of such laws as applied to different situations. Upon assuming office, government officials swear adherence to the political principles upheld by the constitution in their specific field and regarding their specific duties. Judicial review would require judges to go against their oath to the constitution and operate in areas unconcerned with their field, areas in which they do not possess superior capabilities. However, the branches of the government are not equal as the legislature is to preside over the judiciary by sovereign right; thus, the judiciary may not assert itself by judicial review upon a superior branch. Justice Gibson declares that the legislature is the one body of the government that is most closely related to the constitution, as it possesses the power of legislation. Hence, the legislative branch is the one that “gives the law” to society and holds it in its nature “to will and command” (Kutler 33-34). Accordingly, the judiciary receives the law and interprets it. Inevitably, judges must refer to the constitution in order to correctly interpret the laws that are issued unto them, yet this is done with an inferior power than that of the legislature for it does not involve revision of constitutionality but in application of constitutional statutes. Yet, the legislature derives such supremacy in the government from the sovereignty invested unto it by the people. The legislature is sovereign because it is the branch that best represents the will of the people. A government in which the legislature is sovereign is consistent with the ideal of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, as it involves the direct embodiment of the popular will through popular sovereignty. Although the people confer the legislature with sovereign power, it is to be limited and checked by the people themselves; in contrast, judicial review does not offer the same check on the judiciary. The constitution was established as the best articulation of the will of the people, thus it is to preside over government proceedings. Though, all the different bodies of the government must operate in agreement with the constitution, none are infallible and thus their actions may differ from the standards set by the constitution. Particularly, legislations issued by the legislative branch may differ and even conflict with the constitution. In such cases, the constitution must prevail as superior law and the legislature must in turn submit its power to it. Judicial review would establish the Supreme Court as an arbitrator in such cases. Even though, the legislature and the constitution may be in disagreement, these powers are not to resolve their conflict before the judiciary for it is not judicial business to pass judgment on the actions of the legislature. Consistently, the judiciary has no authority on legislative proceedings, like the legislature has no jurisdiction on judicial procedures. Furthermore, since legislative sovereignty is derived from the people, the people are the ones who are to set a limit on legislative abuses. Hence, public opinion is to check the constitutionality of legislative actions. Public opinion is the weapon of the people that protects them from legislative abuses and ensures the constitutionality of legislative actions and it is exercised through suffrage. Though the legislature may be the sovereign branch in the government, true sovereignty lies within the people. The right to vote on representation in the legislature confirms popular sovereignty. Moreover, through judicial review, the people may not directly influence the acts of the judiciary and, thus, they are not allowed to assert their sovereign right to limit and check government actions. By deriving its power form the people, the legislature must answer directly to the people for its actions, and public opinion serves as a limitation and check on its actions to prevent abuses and ensure agreement with the constitution. In our modern era, it is of grave importance to identify the proper roles and powers that each of the separate branches of the government hold. Furthermore, the exercise of true sovereignty lies in the people and not the government, for they are the ones who decide on who to invest it through suffrage. Judicial review represents a digression from the constitutional duties of the judiciary, as supreme power is assigned to the single branch that is most disconnected from the people and thus acts not in favor of the will of the people. The constitution is the best articulation of the will of the people and true sovereignty is claimed by the people’s right to vote. This right is thus exercised upon electing the legislature, which must then act according to public opinion and issue legislations according to the constitution itself. Finally, while the constitution assigns certain powers to the judiciary, it states that the judiciary is bound to the constitution and laws of the nation. Any such power that grants the judiciary a supreme decision over any other branch, such as judicial review, is overstepping the constitution and the popular will. In the future, investing the legislature with its true power will in turn give back to Americans their true sovereignty.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Judicial Discretion

    • 373 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Judicial discretion refers to the authority that judges have for making and interpreting certain laws. Within the United States, judicial discretion is one of the fundamental tenants of the system of law, and is guaranteed in the United States Constitution. Both state and federal judges can exercise judicial discretion, although their discretion is not unlimited.…

    • 373 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Probation officers should adhere to the highest ethical standards and perform their job with honesty and diligence. Probation officers carry out their duties on behalf of the court system. They are meant to function as extensions of the court and to uphold its decisions and rules. Integrity means that probation officers need to understand their positions and carry out their jobs as best they can regardless of personal feelings. Regardless of their own personal opinions, probation officers are obligated to be as unbiased as possible and to relay any pertinent information back to the courts. Their duty is to the community as a whole, as well as to the individual offenders. Probation Officers, whether on or off duty, will abide by and follow all federal, state and municipal criminal laws, as well as those laws governing the…

    • 377 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Mckeever, Robert J. The United States Supreme Court: A political and Legal Analysis. New York and Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1997.…

    • 968 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    <html><head></head><body><p>In a nation of democratic governance, the United States has unquestionably succeeded in its own development and potency since the establishment of the Constitution. The United States was founded in hopes of having a truly free, full functioning society. In order to achieve such a goal, the framers of this country drafted the Constitution brilliantly and attentively. With the creation of the three branches, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial, the Constitution also created checks and balances, the capability for each branch to check the power of the others. To ensure the continuing proficiency of our democratic nation and "checks and balances" system, it is crucial to equalize the branches by separating, and equally distributing power among the three branches. However, before 1803, the judicial branch was lacking such said power over the legislative and executive branches. It was not until the case of Marbury v. Madison that Chief Justice Marshall justified the power of judicial review to the judiciary branch, finally obtaining equal leverage among the legislative and executive branches. With the implementation of judicial review, the U.S. Supreme Court has jurisdiction and authority to strike down law, overturn executive acts, and legally bind a public official to properly carry out constitutional duties. Indisputably, the practice of judicial review is the main power of the United States Supreme Court to date.</p>…

    • 1489 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Court Review

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages

    As we all know that the world of the criminal is always changing and the Law enforcement community needs to change with it. The biggest one would be the courts. There are many things that face the courts today.…

    • 754 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    government essay

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The power of judicial review was never formally delegated either by the Constitution or an Act of Congress, but arose from British common law practices the US Courts adopted as a matter of course. Chief Justice John Marshall formally claimed the right of judicial review in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison, (1803) case. Even though when the legislative, executive, and judicial branched was set up they wanted to give each branch equal power, judicial still seems to have a little bit more than the others. Even though the power to declare laws unconstitutional is not in equal power, it needs to be done. If the Supreme Court didn't who would? Without the power to rule laws unconstitutional who knows what kind of laws would stay in effect. The Court plays an important role in our nation's systems of checks and balances. Without separation of powers and an independent judiciary within a tripartite government, the nation's citizens are at greater risk of tyranny from either or both of the other branches. The Founding Fathers recognized this danger and deliberately fashioned a system of government that, while far from perfect, comes closer to ensuring personal liberty than most other political models. Of our three branches of government - Executive, Legislative, and Judicial - the judiciary is the weakest. It has no power to create new legislation, nor does it have the means of directly enforcing its mandates. Those are two limitations written into our Constitution that prevent the Supreme Court from wielding too much power. Likewise, our system of government provides a means for preventing the President and Congress from becoming despotic, passing and enforcing laws that infringe the rights of its…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the early national period, the judiciary was the weakest of the three branches of government. When Chief Justice John Marshall established the principle of judicial review in MarburyMadison by declaring an act of Congress unconstitutional, he greatly strengthened the judiciary. Even though the high court exercised this prerogative only one other time prior to the Civil War (Dred Scott v. Sanford), the establishment of judicial review made the judiciary more of an equal player with the executive and legislative branches.…

    • 325 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Judiciary Process

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages

    himself because he’s mad at his son for what he did but still loves him.…

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Judicial Review

    • 5261 Words
    • 22 Pages

    Below we lay out the minimum of information you will need to know regarding each of these grounds for JR.…

    • 5261 Words
    • 22 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    judicial

    • 3660 Words
    • 15 Pages

    The Mauritian Economy: 2012 Outlook Executive Summary Bracing for another storm While the Mauritian economy has been resilient thus far, the flip-flops in select Government policies have sent mixed signals to both the private sector and potential investors. Nonetheless, the economy grew at an estimated 4% in 2011 driven by a resurgent textile industry, and a strong performance by the financial sector. A year ago we had believed that the worst was behind; however, the issues surrounding the unsustainable levels of sovereign debt in Europe have now induced a localised mild recession. This will hurt demand and coupled with a weak EUR, we expect stagnation across a few sectors.…

    • 3660 Words
    • 15 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Better Essays

    Judiciary Branch

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages

    The judiciary branch of the United States’ government is comprised of a system of courts, on both federal and state levels, which are used to bring justice to cases between citizens of the States. The power of judicial review gives the courts the authority “to review and, if necessary, declare actions of the legislative and executive branches invalid or unconstitutional” (Ginsberg). It’s interesting that the branch that works to uphold the laws of the U.S. Constitution is sometimes viewed as the “least dangerous branch” of our Government. Referring to writings such as Federalist 78 (by Alexander Hamilton) and Brutus 12 (by James Madison), clears up exactly what the judiciary was set up for, why it is important to have in our Government system, and how it might affect the other branches, the executive and legislative. It is clear while reading the works that the two writers have opposing views. Therefore, it is crucial to study both works and compare their ideas to our current Judiciary to understand how our country has undergone changes within the system.…

    • 1492 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    What is the Supreme Court

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Chief Justice Marshal was now the new Supreme Court Judge who saw the case of Marbury. He misquoted the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789 and portrayed them to be in conflict with one another? He asked this question, “Can an Act repugnant to the Constitution become the law of the land?” By asking this question he created a conflicting problem between an Act and the Constitution, meaning, to resolve the matter would lie in the hands of the Court. Chief Justice Marshal held that the section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the Supreme Court power for writs of mandamus, exceeded the power that was given under the Constitution, so therefore it was not valid and unconstitutional. All this was a way for Chief Justice Marshal to create Judicial Review, he stated the Court had the power to resolve the matter. Chief Justice Marshal was one…

    • 441 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    judicial review

    • 8745 Words
    • 22 Pages

    Judicial review is usually defined as the judicial power in action or the practical aspect of the rule of law. It is defined as a doctrine according to which courts are entitled, in the exercise of the ‘judicial power’ of the State. The power of judicial review entails the authority to examine and decide the question of the constitutional validity of any law, irrespective of whether it comes from primary or subordinate legislation. Under this power, the judiciary can also question the legitimacy of an action or inaction of a person or body with relation to the exercise of a public function.…

    • 8745 Words
    • 22 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Judiciary

    • 696 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Identify the word or phrase that needs to be changed for the sentence to be corrected.…

    • 696 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Judiciary

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Charles Evans Hughes said, “We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is, and the judiciary is the safeguard of our property and our liberty and our property under the Constitution”. The legal system that Belize has is the judiciary and it is an independent branch of the government. Independent from government influence so that it does protect the rights of the ‘small’ people in society (Trueman).…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays