American Judicial System Analysis

Conversely, in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case, Chief Justice John Marshall interpreted the power of judicial review expressed in the constitution differently. He understood the court’s ability to “strike down” legislation as the command of the majority, which was embedded in the Constitution (O’Brien 173). This essay will analyze the juxtaposition between Alexander Hamilton’s blueprint for the Supreme Court in Federalist No. 78 and Chief Justice John Marshall’s

Hamilton interpreted it loosely while Jefferson was strict. This led to an argument about whether the creation of a national bank was constitutional; Hamilton stated it was while Jefferson claimed it wasn’t. Another issue that they clashed

During the process of achieving the goal, he attended the Constitutional Convention. Here, Hamilton spoke out on behalf of his ideas and beliefs. Among many important people at the convention, Hamilton was later named the “Father of the Constitutional Convention”. Standing for New York, Hamilton thought that

The Constitution states in Article III, Section 1 that "the judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish (uscourts.gov). " Lawsuits among two or more states and cases relating to ambassadors and diplomats are examples of cases where the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. The Court also has appellate jurisdiction on virtually any other case that involves violations of constitutional or federal law. Finally, the Supreme Court has the final interpretation of law on all matters concerning the U.S. Constitution, federal laws, and treaties. Consequently, all decisions from Supreme Court have a profound impact on society; even

Brittany Morrison H340- Professor Cappello October 30, 2017 Letter to James Duane Alexander Hamilton September 03, 1780 The American Constitution is a vital segment of the United States’ foundation-- it was the premise of a unique government that did not exist before its time. Although, prior to the Constitution The Founding Fathers of the United States sought to establish a government that would not exploit the American people the way the British government had done so. With considerable fear of corruption, standing armies and lack of representation the Articles of Confederation was enacted. At the outset, the A.O.C had achieved exactly what it was written to do-- supply the governed people with the power over the government.

Alex Frost Values: Law & Society 9/23/2014 The Hollow Hope Introduction and Chapter 1 Gerald Rosenberg begins his book by posing the questions he will attempt to answer for the reader throughout the rest of the text: Under what conditions do courts produce political and social change? And how effective have the courts been in producing social change under such past decisions as Roe v. Wade and Brown v. Board of Education? He then works to define some of the principles and view points 'currently' held about the US Supreme court system.

The three levels within the federal courts are: the U.S. Magistrate Courts, the U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The magistrate courts are the lowest level and as such are limited to trying misdemeanors, setting bail amounts and assisting the district courts. The U.S. District Courts are the federal branch of original jurisdiction courts. These are responsible for criminal trials and giving guilty or not guilty verdicts. The U.S. Courts of Appeals are responsible for all the appeals from U.S. district courts.

It is this branch that can also hear appeals and interpret the laws of the constitution. The Judicial power of the United States is vested in the Supreme Court. Justices of the Supreme Court are appointed by the president but must be confirmed by the Senate. Every bill must be proposed and passed through the House of Representatives and Senate then sent to the president to be signed into law. If the president does not approve of the law he will send it back to congress with his objections and the law must then be voted by 2/3 the House and Senate to become law.

Even though Hamilton wasn’t one of our presidents, he showed great leadership throughout his terms in the secretary of treasury, he practiced law after the wars, and he also showed leadership being one of our Founding Fathers (who were responsible winning our wars against England.) After Hamilton was drafted for the Constitutional Convention by New Year, Hamilton got to attend a meeting in Philadelphia. While Alexander was in Philadelphia he had little to no impact on the convention because he didn’t fully represent New York. Even though Hamilton didn’t represent the Federalist (who strongly opponents to sign the new constitution), Hamilton signed the new constitution as an individual. Then after Hamilton signed the for the new constitution, he got to write “at least two-thirds of the essays” that included some of the most important ones that would explain the powers of each of the branches.

2- The constitution of the judiciary department might be inexpedient to insist rigorously on the principal. The system of checks and balances is one of the big ones. This gives all 3 branches of government about the same power but over certain things. They are all ruled over

Justice Thurgood Marshall Response Justice Thurgood Marshall said in his “Reflections on the Bicentennial of the United States Constitution”, “I do not believe the meaning of the Constitution was forever ‘fixed’ at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start, requiring several amendments, a civil war, and momentous social transformation to attain the system of constitutional government and its respect for the individual freedoms and human rights, that we hold as fundamental as today” (Marshall). In this passage of his essay, Judge Marshall is critical of the government that is

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.

The people who serve are called associate justices. There are 8 of them ,and one leader a total of 9! The leader is called the chief justices are approved by the president and the senate they serve for life .They can only lose their job by impeachment .There are 12 court of appeals , There are 2 important legal concepts. Amendments

Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.

It cannot hold funds from the States, if they do not comply nor can they physically enforce rulings. Therefore, the courts must rely on the respect or prestige of the institution. If the justices/court did not have the weight of the institution backing their ruling, they could easily be ignored by the public, legislative and executive branch. Third, justices are needed due to them providing an avenue to addresses legal controversies. For example, in the lead up to Brown v. Board laws could have been modified in congress, society could have disregarded the laws, or