Rather, the United States’ judicial system should remain impartial and consistent while interpreting the laws as they are written. Also, the Constitution is not an optional document to reference, rather, it is our nation’s original rule book by which the judicial system should base its decisions and interpretations on. As one of the most influential and transformative justices of his time, Justice Scalia’s vision for the Constitution included that of which it is to nail things down so they would last. Although our nation is constantly changing, the Constitution must remain the foundation of our existence as a sovereign nation, and the document itself must not be loosely interpreted and disregarded by flawed and power-hungry justices. To maintain the integrity of our judicial system and maintain a prosperous future for America, it is important we follow Justice Scalia’s vision and leave the Constitution as it was when it was first adopted, while also not repeatedly ignoring and broadly misinterpreting its
Madison case, the outcome could and would have been completely different. The decision he made of ruling in favor of James Madison, rather than William Marbury, was absolute brilliance. Even though he disagreed with Madison and believed Marbury deserved the appointment of a justice, he still had to rule against Marbury because this was the only way to establish the principle of judicial review, one of the most important parts of the system of checks and balances. The three branches of our government would not be equal without the court having such a power. Today, it is accepted that the supreme court will evaluate the federal laws and the acts of the executive and legislative branches.
Parliament knew they could not rule without a king, so they decided to replace Charles. During the English Civil War, justice is best understood as doing what is right to protect the majority. King Charles had a different idea, he wanted to rule the majority to his advantage. Putting King Charles was both just and
The Fathers that created the Constitution so the people of the United States would never be ruled by a tyrant. The idea of Federalism separates the power of the government into states issues, and federal issues. The three branches of government keeps from one group/person in the government from getting too much power and having it go to their head. The three branches it makes it impossible to get more power, and also some states are more populated than other, which means that the bigger states will have more representatives and the others. When writing the Constitution the founding father really tried hard to guard against tyranny by using Federalism, three branches, their powers, and that all states have a say in congress.
James Madison was in some of the most influential government position during some of the most decisive times of American history with in turn had a lasting effect on the future of America. James Madison grew up in Virginia and attended Princeton University with a degree in law, government, and history. He was a political person who wrote the constitution, was secretary of state, and was later president. James Madison is most well know for his work on the Constitution, but was also the secretary of state and the president in times that had the most impact of America as we know it. James Madison is most well known for being the main creator of the Constitution Before James madison became famous, he was researching successful governments in order
Madison is probably the most famous case of modern constitutionalism. All manuals of constitutional law of the United States begins with its exhibition to explain the meaning of the Constitution of this country. However, the interest of the case goes more beyond of the American constitutionalism and settles in the discussion about the place that people must give to the Constitution within the system legal. Moreover, the case Marbury does not refer, as it might seem to a matter of fundamental rights, but rather to one of the possible ways to ensure and enforce the Constitution. In other words, Marbury is a matter of general theory of the Constitution (constitutional supremacy) and theory of Constitutional Procedural Law (the role of judges under the unconstitutional
One of the main Federalist policies was a strong national government. For various reasons, they believed that power should be taken away from states and given to one central government. Federalists also supported Alexander Hamilton 's idea for a national bank as a way to control the finances of the national government. Another federalist idea was to have the national government assume
Thomas Jefferson was a devout Republican and viewed the Constitution as it should be followed strictly by text and empowered congress to enact laws that were mandatory and respectable. He was also a strong supporter of states’ rights and decisions should be left to them to vote on. Here is an example where his stance stood when president Washington ask for advice from his cabinet, while as Secretary of Sate if the United Sates should charter a national bank, “The Bank of the United States”. Jefferson took advantage at every opportunity to express his own views on how to interpret the Constitution and he viewed this as this was not a Congress’s obligation to raise money and was against it. Jefferson sought to limit the powers of the federal government and
This was known as “originalism.” What Antonin Scalia believed in was adherence to the reading and interpretation of the United States Constitution and applying it to the law of the land, exactly as the framers had wrote it in 1790. Justice Antonin Scalia had been reputable and established himself as the principal defender of the constitutional belief of originalism and how the “original meaning” would apply to the theory and concepts of “originalism.” The dominant principle of original-meaning jurisprudence is that there are various provisions of the United States Constitution, and other laws, that are to be construed in agreement with the meaning they held, at the time they were established by the Framers. What Judge Scalia brought to the Courts was the legitimacy of originalism and how it relates to the very nature of law as commanded. This became a new way of thinking with Antonin Scalia joined the courts decades ago. However, before Scalia jointed the courts, the prior viewpoints were on where the Constitutional law was dominated by the idea of “contemporary ratification.” What this meant was, in cases and opinion wans, each generation must interpret the Constitution according to its own needs and the changing society since the Framing of the Constitution.
The main difference between the Federalists and Anti-federalists was their view on the formation of a stronger U.S. Federal Government. This led the Federalists to support ratification of the Constitution and the Anti-federalists to oppose it. The Federalists thought the central government that existed under the Articles of Confederation were weak and wanted a strong central government that would rule the U.S. citizens directly and not through the state government. On the contrary, the Anti-federalists felt that a strong federal government would take a way from individual rights.