This is true, but to interpret the laws and judge their constitution are the two special functions of the court. The fact that the courts are charged with determining what the law means does not suggest that they will be justified in substituting their will for that of
1. Describe these two judicial philosophies. Judicial Activism is when judges/courts do not strictly stick to the interpretation of a law, but create a new one. Easily explained, when an issue is being ruled upon, courts establish a new law to rule broadly on the issue rather than limit their verdict. A lot of magistrates go beyond the constitution and statutes words and use their own political and personal thoughts.
Some cause for concerns can be found in the first writing of the Constitution (the one that will soon be thoroughly discussed) and some lay in more recent Amendments. However, we must not forget that these voices can only be discussed out loud for all opinions to be made on it because of the foresight of those in our past that demanded such rights before approving the Constitution as the foundation of our new government. The Constitution that was written before the ratification debate was adequate in its democracy, but fell short of its goal of creating a government that incorporates all of the citizens views equally and effectively. The Constitution divides the power between the three government
Role and Functions of Law Paper September 27, 2012 Esmeralda Herrera Law/421 Stanley Santire University of Phoenix To understand the roles and how laws function, people must understand the theory of law and how it affects society and businesses. Law is described as the main beliefs and system that is established by a community and is ordered by higher authority; it applies to the people within that community. It does not matter which form of law it is, if it is in the form of legislation, custom or policies laws are appointed and enforced by judicial decision. If laws were not available to follow, society would not function in the manner that they normally do because law
Statutes are created when original court cases are heard and ruled upon. Case law is created by rulings that are a result of examining statutes. Case law can either uphold the original statute or strike it down. Case law turns out to be an interpretation, or a “second look” at statutes, determining whether or not they uphold the U.S. Constitution. It seems to me that statutes can be either struck down after interpretation or continue to be enforced.
A) When a court opinion discusses facts and issues on which the court does not rule, the comments are called dicta. B) Dicta in a court opinion has no influence on other tax proceedings. C) Published articles and tax services are examples of secondary sources of authority. D) Dicta are not authoritative. 64) When a court discusses issues not raised by the facts, the comments A) are excluded from the formal court opinion.
Marshall studied the case in a manner that helped to create the Judicial Review, which allows congress to study the constitutionality of a law. Marshall stated that Marbury is correct in the fact that he is deserving of an appointment, yet the Judicial Act of 1789 is unconstitutional so the court can't give him an appointment. In this case Marshall stated the powers given to the Supreme Court in the Constitution. By using the Marbury v. Madison case, Marhsall was able to create the Judicial Review which gave more power to Federal government, and thus helping his ideas as a federalists. John Marshall also used the powers of Congress and the relationship between federal and state authorities to end a dispute between national and state law regarding banks—McCulloch v. Maryland in 1819.This time was during the Era of Good Feelings as James Monroe was president.
Although the people had a right to be involved in the government, the author of Caesar No. 2 thought that it should be left up to people of greater intelligence to choose the government and its actions. The argument against this was that the people had the ability to choose the people that would have authority in the government. This idea helped place a foothold in the government for the people to always play a role. The last concern was that of the
Checks and balances are put into place so that no one area of the government can have full control or become too powerful. In the three branches checks and balances vary and are essential. The Legislative branch given the power to make laws and is there to check the Executive and Judicial branch. The Executive branch is given the power to carry out the laws and is there to check the Legislative and Judicial branch. The Judicial branch is given power to interpret the laws and is there to check the Legislative and Executive branch.
Presidents use their appointees to cement their legacy, trying to choose individuals who share their ideology. I know that has become a dirty world in how the government uses to interpret the law, but right now, there is a very bright line separating conservative and progressive issues. One should nominate someone who believes in the same causes he or she does. Choosing a nominee who is not, already a judge has the advantage of giving less fodder to the opposition, because she has no opinions available for scrutiny. On the other hand, she could turn out to be something other than the president expected.