How do you think our rights were protected against tyranny by the Constitution? Tyranny is when one person is given all the power to control a country of a government in a dictator like manner. The Constitution guarded against tyranny in several ways, which were federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, big states vs. small states. The first guard against tyranny was Federalism, a system of government in which power is divided between a federal government and state government. The guard of federalism is shown one way in the Constitution when they set up the compound government to make sure that the federal government doesn’t get too much power.
ISSUE 5 Does the President Have Unilateral War Powers? I found this to be an interesting issue about the President having unilateral war powers. I can definitely see the “grey” area and reason for this issue to arise. As stated in the book, the confusion/conflict comes from the constitution and how it’s written. In summary, the Congress is given the power to declare war and “to raise and support armies”, but the president is authorized to serve as commander-in-chief of the armed forces “when called into actual service of the United States.” This means the President has the power to move troops where he deems fit regardless of congress.
Federalism is included in the Constitution by showing that powers were divided between the central government and the states. In document A the chart describes the powers of the states and Central Government. The Central Government pas the power to regulate trade, declare war, provide the army and the navy, and conduct all foreign relations. The states had powers like setting up school, setting up a local government, hold elections, regulate in-state businesses, and pass laws about marriage and divorce. The Central Government and the states also share some powers like taxes, setting up courts, making laws, enforcing laws, and borrowing money.
The additional guard against tyranny was Separation of Powers which means the government was separated into different branches. The Constitution states that the Separation of powers was legislative, executive and judicial branches. Separation of power can defend against tyranny simply because there are 3 powers, not one; which does not make America have an absolute power. The third guard against tyranny was Checks and Balances, which were the balances in the 3 branches of power. In the constitution, there is a diagram stating which branch has power for each other.
His attempt to revive the Roman Empire was a successful one, both in terms of power and longevity. Justinian’s legacy would be that of the most successful Emperor of the Byzantine Empire. The empire expanded under Justinian because of his ability to pick exceptional advisors. The men that he gave power to owed this to him, and were very loyal. Despite many periods of financial and military crisis where the empire faced threats from all sides, it always managed to come through, often due to the Emperor’s advisors.
It is through laws that policies of government are laid down for implementation. It does however have many constitutional roles to fulfil such as the power of the purse, oversight, foreign policy and legislation. It can be argues that Congress does fulfil its constitutional roles as it may deliver effective over sighting, legislation, money bills, representation and foreign policy that may provide good checks and balances. However, most would argue that Congress may not carry its roles effectively thus leading to poor scrutiny (sometimes over scrutinising) which leads to ineffective fulfilment of constitutional roles. The principle organ of the US state is to legislate, represent and scrutinise the other, safely separated, branches of the government.
The title Commander and Chief represents the elected civilian authority over the military that ensures all military forces are subordinate to civil power. The framers of our Constitution understood that a situation could arise where the President may need to use military power without hesitation to defend the nation from foreign attack. They drafted provisions that allowed for immediate defense of the nation from foreign attack but restricted offensive actions to Congressional approval. The precedent of Congressional war powers approval was established by President George Washington in 1793 as described according to Fisher (2012)” President Washington took great care in instructing his military commanders that operations against Indians were to be limited to defensive actions. Any offensive action required congressional authority.
Federalist #78 Analysis The Federalist #78 was written by Alexander Hamilton on May 28, 1788. In the essay, Hamilton expresses his views on the structure of the Judiciary as written in The Constitution. Although Hamilton listed many positive aspects of the Judicial Branch, he also wrote about negative features the Judicial Branch has neglected to offer as stated in The Constitution. In The Constitution, there are three branches to help balance the government, to make sure there is no way to overpower any other branches within the system. The Executive Branch, which includes the president, is in charge of enforcing laws, the Legislative Branch controls making laws, and the Judicial Branch is a system of courts that interpret the laws created and enforced by the other branches.
By doing this it would lead the democracy to a dictatorship. The separation of powers is another way to ensure that checks and balances are being enforced and followed through. Caplan brings the issue of the debate of the meaning of separation of powers, “…the separation of powers means that each branch has exclusive control of matters in its domain or whether the Constitution generally gives Congress and the president overlapping, or blended, powers, all of which are quite extensive but none of which obviously serves as an absolute trump to the other,” (Caplan 21-2) So the presidential power used in the issue of foreign policy has been somewhat validated by this statement
The USA also has a complex legal system, having both national and state courts. Federalism in this sense thus leads to confusion, as what is legal in one state may be illegal in another, making it sometimes difficult for the central government and the people to distinguish between state laws and federal laws. Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes writes “We are under a constitution, but the constitution is what the judges say it is.” The federal-state relationship is a continual source of conflict and controversy, and in these times the Supreme Court handles the issues. However, the federal constitution and the state constitution are open to individual interpretation. Federalism thus allows the Supreme Court to dictate the outcome, and without federalism, there may