Q: “Royal Prerogatives provide unlimited extension of executive power, which is not accountable and unrestricted.” Critically discuss. A: Royal prerogatives refer to the residual powers of the Monarch that are exercised by the executive. While I agree that there are current mechanisms in place that are used to curtail the power of the executive exercising royal prerogatives, these mechanisms are unsubstantial. However, there have been gradual changes in the stance and attitude towards the arbitrary and discretionary use of prerogative power. These changes have led to a shift in the attitude where prerogative powers have been subject to more review and restrictions where appropriate.
I believe the Constitution did a better job of protecting liberties, specifically in the areas of the federal court system, representation of the people, and the levy of taxes. Alexander Hamilton, statesman and economist, proclaimed "Laws are a dead letter without courts to expound and define their true meaning and operation”. The Articles of Confederation which gave rise to the Confederation government that took effect in March 1781, did not give the national government any means to enforce the federal laws. The states could, and often did, choose to interpret or enforce federal laws in any manner they saw fit. This led to disputes amongst the states that could not be readily settled, as it relied on each state’s court system which invariably chose to discount the ruling of the other states.
Sovereignty is used to describe the idea of the power of law making unrestricted by any legal limit, Parliamentary sovereignty is part of the uncodified constitution of the United Kingdom. It dictates that Parliament can make or unmake any laws as it is the ultimate legal authority in the UK. Parliament is still sovereign as it can make law on any matter and it has legislative supremacy. However parliamentary sovereignty can be questioned due to the membership of the European Union and the Human Rights Act. Parliament can make laws on any matter due to Dicey in ‘Law of the Constitution (1885).’ He said that ‘in theory Parliament has total power.
The source is from a modern book named ‘Britain and Ireland, from Home Rule to Independence’ and so you could argue the source is to be given some validity however given that it is a modern text you could question some of the information it presents as it is not a primary source of information. The source suggests that Asquith’s policy and attitude was not proactive enough, therefore criticising his methods. The source states that this as well as his ‘blunder’ of including Ulster in the Home Rule Bill of 1912, which subsequently caused the first and immediate threat of Civil War in Ireland was just some of the error. This source therefore supports this view to a great extent because of this evidence. Source 8 does not support this view, however the only evidence supporting it being that tensions between Nationalists and Unionists was high and that because of their differences Ireland was preparing for a Civil War, as suggested by source 7.
Another limitation referring to the source could be the media becoming very hostile. They could portray the Prime Minister as a very weak and unworthy character which could affect his personal image, but also the image of the party they lead. 2b) With reference to the source, and your own knowledge, explain the Prime Minister’s prerogative powers (10). The prerogative powers that the Prime Minister enjoys are the extensive arbitrary powers that they enjoy. These powers were first exercised by the monarch but they are now exercised by the prime minister.
It is not surprising to see John Scopes challenging it. However, it is the manner he challenge the Act, which deem him as in the wrong, hence rendering any rights he have, teaching or speaking, useless. It is perfectly acceptable for one to disapprove of the law, and perhaps challenge it in hope for an amendment. If Scopes wanted a amendment to the Butler Act, he should have done It in the proper and legal fashion. He should have gone to the parliament and proposing a amendment to the Butler act and put it to a vote.
02.01 Revolutionary Ideas: Assessment 1) Natalia Valencia, Mr. L, 2/10/14 title: Let Freedom Reign Human Rights For All | 2) the declaration of independence: the main purpose of the declaration of independence was to explain why colonies were leaving England; to justify they were forced to make what we know as a treason and explain why it wasn’t such. The declaration of independence is often, by those who are not experts in the subject, confused with the constitution or even the bill of rights in it. It states that the government was certain responsibilities for the govern that it cannot break. People agreed for religious freedom, government representation, and taxation. Men who signed this in despair for freedom, risked their lives
In a passage from The Right Of The Colonists, Samuel Adams writes “The Legislative cannot justly assume to itself a power to rule by extempore arbitrary decrees;”. The following from The Declaration of Independence sates the reasons for separation from Great Britain: “…establishing therein an Arbitrary government… introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:”. This passage states that the Crown established its own arbitrary government, subdued to the King’s rule. However, The Rights Of The Colonists states that such an action by the Crown violates the colonists
It was a confederation of independent states. The government couldn't enforce regulations; this led to states having ultimate authority. The Revolutionary war had a strong outcome on why the Articles failed. The Feds were too weak and the states were too strong. "It was properly called a confederation (a system of government in which states retain sovereign authority except for the powers expressly delegated to the national government) because, it’s provided under Article II."
A number of reasons explaining why a constitution is considered to be a living document include, the ideas of separation of power, checks and balances, judicial reviews and the process of amendment. In relation to the idea of separation of power a constitution is regarded to a living documents because this idea encompasses a model that defines who is in control of a state. This idea of separation of power emphasizes that several branches make up the state (Strauss 45). Each of the branches is unique and distinct from the other in terms of its responsibilities. Additionally, it exercises power independently to avoid conflicting with the other branches.