To begin with, it is important to note the distinct definition of certain terms. This is because the better part of this discussion will be based on the use of such terms. For instance, the Judiciary can be defined as the system of courts which has the major responsibility of interpreting and applying the law. This is usually done in the name of the state. The judiciary is at times is also referred to as the jurisdiction or the judicial system. It therefore provides an efficient mechanism for the resolution of conflicts within a given state.
The judiciary works under a given doctrine referred to as the separation of power. As a result, it therefore does not necessarily make the laws nor enforced them. However it interprets the laws and enhances their application in the relevant cases. The judicial system of a government usually comprises a series of courts. The most important one is the court of final appeal, also known as the Supreme Court or the constitutional court. In line with that, the court of final appeal in the setting of the United States of America is called the United States Supreme Court.
This discussion shall therefore comprise an exploration of some of the main aspects of the U.S Supreme Court. The judicial system has extreme power over the laws that govern the state. Despite the privilege, the arm of the government has ensured that the main aspect of justice is not compromised. This is because the interpretation and the application of the laws have always been a professional and critical approach. This ensures that every member of the state has an equal amount of subjection to the law. In other words, the laws are interpreted and applied in such a manner that they do not favor particular individuals over the others.
The judicial system through its power ensures a number of activities like professional consultations and consideration of the various legal factors. By making the right state considerations, the laws that end up being applied are those that are conducive and accommodative of all. In order to ensure that this standard is maintained at all times, the Judiciary has always incorporated the process of judicial review. The process has been limited though by the influence of other government branches. This amount of ‘fairness’ has led to the judicial system being one of the least dangerous arms of the government in the U.S. This is more or less the same stipulation as presented by Hamilton.
According to Hamilton, the Judiciary has been viewed as the least dangerous to the constitution’s political rights. This is true and most of this has always been evident in the functions of the Judiciary and more precisely the Supreme Court of the United States. The court has maintained its simple mandate to offer judgment. This has been based on appropriate evidence, consideration and application of the law to the later.
It is also true from the functions of the court as outlined, that its operations have rarely been independent. The decisions and the operations in most cases have usually been linked to the influence of other arms of the government. The judicial system and the Supreme Court to be particular, deserves to operate independent of the influence of the other arms of the government. I therefore tend to agree with Hamilton’s argument that the court, which many have seen as the weakest arm of the government, should be allowed room to carry out its mandate.
This arm should also be accorded protection from the other branches of the government. This will help give room for the implementation of the various mandates. Due to the fact that the operation of the judiciary has always been influenced by other branches of the government like the executive, there has been very limited judicial review. Some of these activities have been hindered which has led to the inclusion of unfavorable portions in the constitutional laws.
The issues discussed above have greatly limited the judiciary and the hence the Supreme Court form exercising some of its powers to the fullest. This arm of the government should be allowed the freedom to declare laws. There should be room for strong judicial review especially when it comes to the operations of some branches of the government. Because of their influence, for instance the executive branch, there has resulted a judicial restrain. This implies that the arm lacks the full freedom to declare certain actions invalid even when such actions contradict the constitution.
The federal constitution has therefore been viewed as limited. This is a fact which has led to low judicial activism. This is because a vital power of the government has had its operations squeezed under certain laws. The legislative arm of the government in particular has had its powers limited. This is the same argument by Hamilton and the limitation of power is one evident one going by the functions of the judiciary in the States. When other powers like the congress get to specify the functions of the other arms then they gain a freedom that can be considered unnecessary. For instance, the congress may pass a law which is not constitutional but because it specifies the limits of this constitution, it barely will be hindered nor be affected. This places the citizens in danger of being exposed to policies, laws and rules that may well be unfavorable and hard to cope with. When issues take such a turn then it becomes hard to for the government to take into account the general view of the public which is quite unfair. I therefore agree with Hamilton’s arguments concerning the judicial power and the federal government. Perhaps the most vivid aspect here which needs an urgent adjustment is the freedom of operation of the judicial arm. The arm has a power which it rarely exercises but should.
Benefit from Our Service: Save 25% Along with the first order offer - 15% discount, you save extra 10% since we provide 300 words/page instead of 275 words/page
The Supreme Court, starting from its name has always been a symbol of one of the most powerful authorities in America’s judicial system. It is in actual sense the most powerful court. It is the Court where cases of final appeal are heard. The description of the power and authority of this branch of the judicial system has always been clear. However, we ought to ask ourselves if this court actually has the powers that the name seems to suggest.
Going by the definition of the functions of this Court, I can well respond to the same question by expressing my doubt as to whether it has become too powerful. The Court has always been limited to simply making judgments. However, most of the functions and activities which go on within this branch of the judiciary are always influenced by other arms.
The effect of other arms of the government has led to a lot of minimization of the powers of this arm. As a result, I can conclude that the court has not become as powerful as many a people think. For instance, the rules and the laws are governed by the congress hence the Court has the least threat to such branches of the government. If it was all that powerful then its wrath ought to be equal towards every direction. The fact that the congress manipulates the operation of the judicial system of the government implies that it can barely be touched by the judicial procedures. As a result, some individuals in other positions can breach the constitutional requirements in one way or the other but still go untouched. This mostly happens because of the influence that these people have one the operation of the Court.
Furthermore, the appointment of the Justices and other members of the Supreme Court is generally influenced by the executive arm of the government. This implies that the Court cannot carry out its in house responsibilities without the scrutiny of the other branches. Such allowances have led to Justices serving for long periods of time. As a matter of facts, they serve throughout their lives irrespective of the extent to which they get to deliver. This may at times lead to ineffective individuals remaining in the house not by the virtue of their good work but by the fact that the constitutional provisions allow them to.
The judicial system as a whole requires the independence to go about it with the least influence of other branches. In the same way the Supreme Court which is one of the major constituents of the judiciary should have room to work independently. This strategy can help in the achievement of justice in some cases and a general fairness to the public. The effective operations of the Court with the least external influence can equally increase efficiency in handling the cases.
Book The Best Top Expert at our service
Your order will be assigned to the most experienced writer in the relevant discipline. The highly demanded expert, one of our top-30 writers with the highest rate among the customers.Hire a TOP writer for $10.95
The Court ought to act as a fundamental body within the government where the laws are effectively interpreted before being applied. This means, the matters of the Court should remain within the house as this equally assists in the establishment of legal integrity. However, as a result of the influence by other branches of the government, maintaining a smooth flow in the proceedings of a case may at times prove tricky. This may be caused by other individuals altering the contents of file or simply manipulating the outcome due to their positions. As much as this may not be the reported case on the day to day basis, the fact is it happens. With such a mode of operation, one cannot simply say that the Supreme Court has become powerful. Some of its decisions may be influenced in a manner that lowers the effectiveness of the processes involved. As a result of the above arguments, I can therefore conclude that the Supreme Court has not become as powerful as people think or perhaps as it ought to be.