preview

Dbq Essay On The Judicial Branch

Satisfactory Essays
The argument/famous Supreme Court case Madison vs. Marbury asked us the question should the Judicial Branch be able to declare laws unconstitutional. I think the Judicial Branch should be able to declare a law unconstitutional. I believe this because the judicial branch is very small, they have no other checks on any other branch, and they don’t receive any money.
The Judicial Branch is so small. It doesn’t have as many parts to it as the Executive and Legislative Branches. They also don’t do as much as the other branches, because while the Legislative Branch creates Laws and the Executive Branch controls most of the federal organizations the Judicial Branch just hears different cases that appeal through the lower courts. One Example of this is in document B where is says,” The judiciary, from the nature of its functions, will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the
…show more content…
This means that they can’t really be bribed. Document B talks about this when it says, “The judiciary, on contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society;” This is saying that the Judicial Branch has no control over the money or power of the government. For this reason there is really no way for the Judicial Branch to be bribed. This makes their decisions based actually on what they think and not what other people want them to think.
As stated earlier I believe that the Judicial Branch should have the right to decide if a law is constitutional or not. The court case of Marbury vs. Madison is important because it brought up this point. I believe this is true because the judicial branch is very small, they have no other checks on any other branch, and they don’t receive any money. Because they are the branch to decide if something is lawful or not they are the perfect branch to make the decision on whether something is constitutional or
Get Access