Explain The Strengths Of The Judicial Branch

1. What three branches were created by the Constitution? The three branches that were created by the Constitution are the Legislative Branch, Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch.

Only then will the judges be able to protect the constitution and the rights and privileges of the citizens, along with changing the minds of the framers who thought the judicial branch was weak. Hamilton emphasized that it was necessary for the judicial branch to take advantage of its power of checks and balances and make itself independent, however, still continue to work hand in hand with the

Government Institutions in Texas Many people believe the Texas Judicial Branch needs refurbishing for the 21st century. However, the Texas Judicial Branch operates efficiently now because of the way Texas has set up its Judicial Branch and court system. The reason for this is because Texas has structured layers of courts and those layers of courts allow cases ideal time to be heard, which works efficiently and adequately for the court system.

The American National Government has many strengths and weaknesses that contribute to the way of life as American’s over the last 200 year plus history of the United States. Our founding fathers signed the Constitution which paved the way for the branches of government, federal bureaucracy, and interest groups to operate and conduct affairs. Through analysis from different sources, it has been proven there are flaws that can be improved on in our nation. Although the United States government is viewed as one of the strongest in the world, there are ways we as a nation can improve as well as continue to build upon to be the strongest government possible for the people of the United States. In order to identify the strength and weakness we will

But, as with its Commerce Clause jurisprudence, the Court’s expansive rights jurisprudence may not be taken for granted. Consider the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges case, which legalized same-sex marriage in all states. That decision, undeniably, was an audacious assertion of power by the Supreme Court, one that brought the guillotine down on states’ internal deliberations as to the merits of same-sex marriage. I thus cannot deny that this decision counts in favor of the view that the Court holds a bias toward centralization, but there is another side to this coin, namely, the four impassioned dissenting opinions delivered by the Court. The principal dissent among these decried the Court for “invalidat[ing] the marriage laws of more than half the States” without their assent.

The Supreme Court, while conceivably powerful and instituted to uphold the Constitution, actually has little ability to harness and implement its power to protect minorities. The opinions/rulings of the Supreme Court are not directed to the public, rather these opinions are directed to check the other two branches of government, which are able to implement rulings to protect minorities, if they so choose. Simply, the Court acts as a “middle man.”

How Roles and Power Evolved Over Time Roles and powers of the U.S. Supreme Court has evolved since the founding period. You may hear things like is that what the Founding Fathers might have wanted or that not what they wanted for us. However, there is no real ideal of what our Founding Fathers really wanted for America. Roles and powers has changed during time by methods of constitutional interpretation and the way courts promote both the common good and individual liberty. The Constitutional interpretation is when the judiciary uses methods and strategies to interpret the law.

In the United States, the powers of the legislative branch, judicial branch, and executive branch are divided between three separate institutions: Congress, made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate, the Supreme Court, made up of the nine justices of the Supreme Court, and the President of the Unites States, respectively. Each branch maintains an amount of power over the other two while also being subject to the other two. This three-branch system of government is the manifestation of the ingenuity of the Constitution and is a testament to the endurance of the nation. Congress, or the legislative branch, is responsible for introducing new laws and passing them through both chambers of representatives, the House and the Senate.

Judicial review refers to the ability of the Court to interpret laws and executive actions in terms of constitutionality. If such law is found to be violative of the Constitution, or the actions taken are beyond the powers granted by the Constitution, it is liable to be struck down by the Court as void. Marbury v. Madison set precedent to the role and power of the judicial branch. Chief Justice John Marshall asserted that the Constitution was a superior law that cannot be changed by ordinary means. In addition, the acts of Congress, the executive, and the states reflect temporary view of what the law is and if these acts conflict with the fundamental law of the Constitution, then they are not entitled to enforcement and must be disregarded.

Hana Kim Professor Yvonne Wollenberg Law and Politics 106 7 October 2015 Title In the United States government, there are three branches called the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. Out of these three, the judicial branch is the most powerful. The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court, the court with the most power in the country, and other federal courts that are lower in the system; the purpose of this branch is to look over laws and make sure they are constitutional and reasonable.

Throughout the course of our nation’s history, there has been a debate about the best way to select judges. While most agree that judges should be impartial, objective, and nonpartisan, there is still much deliberation about the best way to achieve that. Judicial selection by descriptive representation, which is the idea that the court should mirror demographically its constituents in terms of things like race and gender, is the best way to ensure a competent, independent, and well-qualified judiciary. By reflecting the diverse population of the United States, judicial selection by descriptive representation would ensure a well-rounded group of justices that bring many different minds to each case, increase the public’s confidence in the court

Diversity has been recognised as a valuable initiative in the advancement of a workplace, however recent studies in England and Wales show that the judiciary remains largely imbalanced . For decades diversity has been a central matter within the legal sphere but according to a recent report by the Council of Europe published at the end of 2014, women only make up 25% of judges in England and Wales and to this day, Lady Hale remains the only representative for women in the Supreme Court . Furthermore, diversity statistics in 2015 concluded that the percentage of BME judges remains unchanged at 7%. Damning statistics such as these prove that the judiciary is currently in a detrimental situation, particularly because diversifying the workplace encourages innovation: ‘There is a large body of evidence going back many decades which shows that more culturally diverse businesses are more innovative. Recent research also shows that workforce diversity is also

A judiciary should represent the diversity of society as well as the diversity of the legal

Political parties serve countless roles in America’s government. Foremost, it needs to be said they are crucial to America’s political system. The political parties are the heart and brain of our government's body, urging people to conceive and feel different ways on different topics whether the controversy is over how money is distributed or the way immigrants should be treated or dealt with. With each party having a biased view it shows how a group can be increasingly powerful with bountiful amounts of support, names and divisions can be heard. Democrats are widely known to be liberal rather than conservative.

The political party model then spread over many parts of Western Europe, including France and Germany, over the 19th century. Since then, they have become the most common political system in the world. In this essay, we will show how political parties are essential to ensuring democracy. We will also show that there are unavoidable negative consequences to the party system. One of the fundamental tenants of democracy is the