Checks and balances provide a way to make sure no one branch reaches total power. For instance, Congress can try to pass a law but the President can veto any bill that comes his way. Also, if the President ends up doing something unconstitutional, Congress has the power to conduct a trial and impeach the President if necessary. In essence, these checks and balances prevent the US from becoming a totalitarian country. The court case of Marbury v Madison happened when Marbury’s was withheld by Madison and ended up suing James.
When he proposed the creation of the national debt the anti-federalist protested against this idea because in the Constitution it never stated anything about a bank. Hamilton believed that the Constitution should be interpreted loosely and do anything that was necessary and proper. Lastly he believed that the government should be run by the educated and wealthy not the common people. Thomas Jefferson is known as the author of the Declaration of Independence and leader of the Anti-Federalists. His political views were opposite of Hamilton’s.
For example, in Brown v BoE 1954, the Supreme Court ended segregation in schools, allowing black children to go to school with white children. Also, in Roe v Wade 1973, they ruled that women had the right to an abortion. Furthermore in McCutcheon v FEC 2014, the Supreme Court overturned limits on aggregate federal campaign contributions. This shows that issues that should be dealt with by Congress are being handled by the Supreme Court who are an unelected body and so should not have that amount of power. However, the Supreme Court has no enforcement power of its own.
The case, Brown vs. The Board of Education after making its way through the lower courts, was heard by the Supreme Court in 1953. Plaintiffs argued that public school segregation violated the equal protection clause of the fourteenth Amendment in that the segregation of public schools was in no way conducive to the equality that was supposedly guaranteed to accompany the “separate but equal” principal established under Plessey v. Ferguson (Brown & Valk, 2004). John W. Davis, the lead defense attorney in Brown, argued that not only had segregation been put in place maintaining equal standards for blacks and whites, but also that segregation was an entrenched practice that was best for wellbeing of both blacks and whites (Brown & Valk, 2004). The Court unanimously sided with the plaintiff.
The Constitution had some borderline issues within it, for example, the qualifications of voters and citizenship for example (Roche 812). The Constitution had to accommodate for the people who felt overlooked and not equal. For instance, the Three Fifths compromise showed absolutely no equality to African Americans. African Americans would be both counted as representation three fifths of a person and taxation. Another is the Electoral College which only gave states a minimal of three electoral votes.
Because they left too much power with the states. The federal government had no power to levy or collect taxes, no power to regulate trade, and no power to enforce laws. There was also no executive branch under the Articles of Confederation, and no national court system. So the delegates had to create a national government that would actually work out and have no tyranny towards who has little power or strong power between a person or a group of people. So ask yourself, what did the constitution do to oppose cruelty?
Essentially the justices and judges are permitted to make any decision on court cases without any major consequence. For example, in the Brown vs. Board of Education case in 1954, the Supreme Court overturned the rulings from the Plessy vs. Ferguson case in 1896 by declaring that state laws that established separate public schools for black and white students denied black children equal educational opportunities. At the time, this decision was not accepted and without the privilege of being elected for life, many of the justices would have been fired for their rulings. The Judicial Branch is as well entitled to the Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of a court to determine the constitutionality of a governmental action.
The Articles played an important role by proving a strong central government was not to be feared, it was a necessity. Following the Revolution, Americans desired to be free from burdensome taxes, to have a market economy and, most of all, not to be manipulated by a distant head of state. The former colonies existed as 13 individual republics, only tenuously as a union. The Constitution, which would not be written until 1787, declared supremacy over state laws, let the federal government tax the people and gave power to an executive. Because of this sharp contrast in ideology, it is clear the Constitution would not have been ratified immediately after the Revolution.
Separation of Powers is the division of power between the three branches of government- legislative, executive, and judicial. Baron de Montesquieu believed that no one branch of government should have too much power. When congress passes a law, the Supreme Court declares it constitutional or unconstitutional. The Constitution separates the powers among the three branches so no one person or group can control the government. The power is distinct, but
51, therefore government is necessary to control its people but with the limit power so that there will be no self-interested ambitions held by government. With the separation of powers, each branch will have way to limit the power of other branches. For example, “Congress is given the chief lawmaking power under the Constitution, but a bill can become a law only if the president signs it. The Supreme Court has the power to reject a law formulated by Congress and signed by the president if it is contrary to the Constitution” (Edward S. Greenberg). With this way, the self-interest ambition of one branch will counter the ambition of other branches just like James Madison wrote in federalist no.