Although Alexander Hamilton famously described the judiciary as the weakest branch of government that existed under the tripartite system of the separation of powers, this statement cannot be said to be entirely true in the context of the Irish constitution. The Irish constitution attempts to lay out a system which creates three equal branches of government, capable of exercising a series of checks and balances to prevent the power of any other branch exceeding what has been mandated by the constitution. This essay aims to look at the importance of the role of the Irish judiciary in the separation of powers, and how it has a power equal to that of both the legislature and the executive. This will be looked at through three main parts. Firstly, the separation of powers will be explored (with a focus on the judiciary) in order to understand the scope of power afforded to each branch. Following this the interactions of the judiciary and other branches will be examined to gain a better understanding of the lines drawn between the judiciary and other branches. Finally the question of whether the judiciary is the weakest branch of government will focused on, with the aim of demonstrating that the powers of the Irish judiciary are quite substantial …show more content…
The idea of the separation of powers is regarded as the basic framework at the heart of the Irish constitution. This separation is put forward in article 6.1 of Bunreacht na hÉireann and divides the power between three organs of government – the legislature, the executive and the judiciary. Such a tripartite separation of powers is thought to be a distinct feature of many modern constitutions which aims to prevent the abuse of power by any one organ of government through a system of checks and balances. In order to understand the role of the judiciary within the system, it is necessary to briefly establish the powers of the other organs
In order to uphold the constitution, the Supreme Court must always aim to balance power among the branches of government and not overstep boundaries in exercising its own power. For this reason, the debate over handling political questions in the courtroom
Alexander Hamilton longs to compare the judicial to the other branches of government and, based on his findings, concludes that the judicial branch therefore is the least harmful to the rights of the Constitution. He says it has “neither Force nor Will but merely judgment”. This makes the judicial branch seem weak because with his statement, Alexander Hamilton connects the executive branch have the authority of ‘force’ being that it allows decision making within the courts. Alexander Hamilton also relates the ‘will’ to the cannot stand as activist based on the legislative branch. I agree with Hamilton on his opinion of how the judicial branch strands distinct from the others because it is in fact true to that the legislative and execute branches hold more weight in causing more danger to the rights of the Constitution than the
When a men rule over other men, that can be dangerous and even deadly. The government must control the governed and control itself (Madison 1). A nation’s administration must depend on people for its direction, but there are some reservations that must be maintained. Two views are presented about why the federal system of America should follow a constitution. The first is that usurpations are protected with the division and distinctions in governmental departments (Madison 2).
Sophie Byrne John Ward POLI 100 29 March 2023 Two Week Essay Assignment Week 10 & 11 In "The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review," published in the Yale Law Journal, Jeremy Waldron argues against the concept of judicial review, which is a concept allowing courts to strike down laws that are deemed unconstitutional. Waldron argues that this concept undermines democracy and should be replaced by a system of parliamentary sovereignty; where the legislative branch holds the power to determine the final outcome when interpreting the constitution.
In order to strengthen the government, three branches were put into place, each holding specific powers. These include the Legislative branch which creates laws, “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers…” (2: Source A). The Executive branch that is meant to enforce laws, “He shall take care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States” (2: Source A). Lastly, the Judicial branch interprets the laws created, “The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity arising under this Constitution…” (2: Source A).
Conflict with the Courts falls under the AP theme: Politics and Power. Madison’s midnight appointed judges did not have the chance to be given their commission letters and future judge Marbury called upon the Supreme Court to force Secretary Madison to give over his commission. Their legendary decision to not force an executive official to act was a win for the current administration because it kept more Federalists from gaining power in the judiciary system. Their overturning of Congress’s Judiciary Act of 1789 as unconstitutional was of more significance than their lack of action in commanding Madison to deliver letters. The Supreme Court overturning the Judiciary Act was caused by their realization that the judiciary branch should not have
It is noted by Hamilton and Madison that the most powerful branch, however, is the legislative. In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton stated that the judicial branch was perhaps the least dangerous of the three, due to the fact that it will not put the liberty of the people at risk, as opposed to the executive and the legislative. He mentions that as long as all three branches are separate, then the judiciary “will always be the least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; because it has the least capacity to annoy or injure them.” The executive branch “holds the sword” and the legislative “commands the purse.” The judiciary, controlling neither sword nor purse, neither “strength nor wealth of the society,” has neither “FORCE nor WILL but merely
Under these conditions, no one branch can obtain too much power in the government. These checks along with many others are the reasons for the long lasting success in the prevention of
“ … it is requisite the government be so constituted as one man need not be afraid of another” (Document 2). In some countries, today and in the past, there are instances of dictators creating and enforcing laws that void an individual’s natural rights, but because of Montesquieu's influence on the division of power, the people have no need to fear the government abusing its power. According to the revolutionary enlightenment thinker, there can be no liberty if the legislative and executive powers have equal authority because then tyrannical laws could be imposed. Liberty also can’t be had if the judicial branch isn’t separate from the executive and legislative because if it were joined with the legislative branch, citizens would be exposed to arbitrary control; were it joined with the executive branch, the judge might behave with the violence of an oppressor (Document 2). This concept of checks and balances is directly seen in the Constitution.
The Judicial Branch is located in Article 3 Section 1 of the Constitution, that branch has the responsibility of determining laws and how to relate them to society today. In September 1787, a system called Checks and Balances were incorporated in the Constitution. Checks and Balances help control the power of the three separate
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.
Divided government occurs when one political party controls the presidency and another controls one or both houses of Congress. The struggle between parties can create significant issues for the government, including the appointment of judges and high officials and the creation of effective problem-solving legislation. Divided government creates an issue for the president in making federal appointments. The president has the constitutional power to nominate ambassadors, judges, and high officials, but these nominees are subject to Senate confirmation. When the government is divided the president and the Senate are of different political parties, this creates a problem in the appointment of these positions.
Do you ever wonder if the separation of powers in the government is important or not? The Separation of powers among the branches of the government is important because it makes sure that one branch or group of people/a person is not overpowering the rest of the government. The Separation of powers also ensures that the government is listening to the citizens and is keeping the rights and liberties that the citizens have. In this essay, i will explain to you how each branch of the government ensures that the other branches abide to the constitution and ensure that they keep the promise of Freedom and the rights of the citizen. Topic from yellow Each branch of the government makes sure that the other branches are not overpowering or breaking
Separation of powers refers to the idea that the major body of a state should be functioned independently and that no individual of a state should have power separately. Therefore, separation of powers means that splitting up of responsibilities into different divisions to limit any one branch from expurgating the functions of another. The intention of the doctrine is to prevent the application of powers and provide for checks and balances of governing a state. It is a doctrine of constitutional law under which the three branches of government, executive power, legislative power, and judicial power are been kept separately to prevent abuse of power.
Differences between Parliamentary sovereignty and Constitutional supremacy The doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty of the United Kingdom parliament is often presented as a unique legal arrangement without parallels in comparative constitutional law. By giving unconditional power to the Westminster Parliament, it appears to rule out any comparison between the Westminster Parliament and the United States Congress or the Malaysian Constitution, whose powers are carefully limited by their respective constitutions. Parliamentary sovereignty is thus seen as a unique feature and a result of the unwritten constitution. If parliamentary sovereignty is to be a legal doctrine, it must rely on a list of powers that belong to parliament as an institution. These legal powers are organised in powers and disabilities and are thus both empowering and limiting.