Judicial Appointments: Checks And Balances In Practice By Rachel Brand

On August 2nd, 1964, three North Vietnamese Navy Cruisers were “unprovoked”, and fired on the USS Maddox while it was on a “standard patrol” in the Bay of Tonkin.[1] President Lyndon B Johnson proclaimed this event in a speech that provoked the first attack, ordered by him before war was declared on Vietnam. However, that event was most likely a fake created to increase action in North Vietnam.[2] Does the United States Constitution protect the United States from tyranny of the president over the people’s peace like that? The United States Constitution was written to give strength to the failed Articles of Confederation, and to protect the citizens from tyranny. Sadly, it was written in the 1700s. Tyranny is defined when one group or individual

The president serves not only as the head of the executive branch of government, but also as the commander in chief of the armed forces. As chief executive, the president operates and controls the different executive agencies, such as the Department of

Each branch of government has control over their duty. The legislative branch has to power to approve presidential nominations, override a President’s veto, impeach President, and remove him or her from office. The executive branch can veto congressional legislation (Doc C). The judicial branch can confirm the President’s nominations, and it can declare presidential acts unconstitutional. Each of the branches of government keep each other in check. This act is called checks and balances. Each branch of government checks on another to keep them balanced. This guards the U.S. Constitution against tyranny because one branch does not overpower

The American government is associated as being one of the best and most efficient governments in the world. The American government was made by the citizens for the citizens of the United States. That’s why people think that the American government works so well. There are other governments on the other hand, that suppress their citizens. Governments where the citizens have no say in their government and can only let the government do what they want. One of these governments is the North Korean government. These two governments may look like complete opposites, but they do share some similarities between them.

The quality of judges would without a doubt increase if they were appointed. However, I do not agree with the idea of judges being appointed. When looking at the partisan aspect you notice several possible issues with one issue being, is that individual the right person to do the job. Partisan election of judges allows for an individual that may not be as qualified for the job to be elected into the position. Nevertheless the partisan election of judges gives the voters what they want based on party affiliation along with qualifications. Appointing the judges on the other hand would only benefit that particular party affiliation. The outcome of judges being appointed would ultimately bring more harm than good. The plus for appointments would

What is actually happening is allowing Supreme Court justices to serve for life. An article stated that “by making new appointments less frequent, longer tenure has diminished the abilities of presidents and senators to provide the only form of democratic accountability that is consistent with judicial independence,” (Jr., Stuart Taylor. ). William Douglas, who has set record for Supreme Court tenure (almost 37 years) who has cast the deciding vote, along with Hugo Black who retired at the age of 85 and Thurgood Marshall who retired at the age of 83. “ I’m getting old and falling apart,” Marshall said on his last day (Jr., Stuart Taylor. ). That’s why it is better to bring fresh perspectives, and especially those people who understand the

When people think of a good judge they typically think of somebody who is fair, not bias and has some sort of experience. However, in today’s society, particularly in the United States, our judicial selection methods are not made to select judges on their ability to reason well and rule impartially (Carter and Burke, 6). On top of that, judges have no actual training before they become part of the judiciary. The only training they receive is in school when they are studying the law. Sometimes when they pursue an apprenticeship with a judge they also get a little bit more experience or insight into a judge’s job.

Sonia Sotomayor was the first Latina Supreme Court Justice in U.S. history. She was nominated by president Barack Obama on May 26, 2009.

Contrary to popular belief, the United States has two constitutions: the Articles of Confederation and the present day constitution. So, what happened to the Articles of Confederation? The Articles of Confederation failed for many reasons: the reluctancy of the individual states to surrender their powers to a national government, the impotence of Congress to tax the colonies in order to pay off war debts or pay veterans of the American Revolution, the inability to back up the currency coined by Congress, the institution of multiple currency as states began to coin their own money, and the lack of power to regulate trade and commerce among the states or foreign nations. In addition, the Articles of Confederation limited the executive and judicial

The Executive branch executes laws and is the president. The Judicial branch judges laws and is the Supreme Court. The Legislative branch creates laws and is the House of Representatives and Senate. James Madison said in Federalist Paper #47 Document B, “the accumulation of all powers...in the same hands...may be justly pronounced the very definition of tyranny.” This helps protect from tyranny because the Separation of Powers prevents all power from being in the same hands. Likewise, the Separation of Powers is even more protected with the use of checks and

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 legislative, executive, and judicial branches each have ways to check the power of another branch. Congress has the power to approve and confirm Presidential nominations, override a President’s veto, impeach the President and remove him or her from office, and impeach judges from office. The President can nominate judges and veto Congressional legislation. The Court has the rights to declare presidential acts and laws unconstitutional. “...the constant aim is to divide and arrange the several offices in such a manner as that they may be a check on the other…[the three branches] should not be so far separated as to have no constitutional control over each other.” (James Madison, Federalist Paper #51, 1788). This quote by James Madison shows that the Constitution basically separates powers of each branch, and gives each the right to stop the other if they feel that something isn’t fair or equal without creating a ruler or making one branch the strongest. With the concept of checks and balances, the founding fathers were able to stop soft tyranny, and keep government in a balanced and equal

The Magna Carta and the English Bill of Rights had an influential impact on the formation of the United States Constitution. The Magna Carta restricted the power of the king and gave many limitations on the government. It gave many rights to the citizens regarding their properties. The first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution make up our Bill Of Rights. Many of our U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights were based off both of these two documents.

There are state levels and federal levels of the executive branch, at state level the executive branch includes governors and also their staff and at the federal level the executive branch includes the President, the vice President, staffs of appointed advisors and a few other departments and agencies that may seem familiar such as the central intelligence agency and the federal bureau of investigation even the post office. The executive branch does many things, such as appointing federal judges and they deal in the nations domestic and foreign policies. Checks and balances are in place to limit the power of the executive branch. The limitations and accountability within the executive branch are through electorate and congress by both impeachment and over ride of executive

Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate. There are a few ways that the President