Obergefell V. Hodges (2005)

The United States currently faces a severe problem with one of their governmental processes. In the democratic system of the United States, politicians are elected by voting from the citizens, in most cases. The problem the United States is facing is that people are no longer voting in elections for officials. This problem is discussed in the article, “In praise of low voter turnout”, written by Charles Krauthammer. The main idea behind this article is that voters are no longer interested in politics, as they were in previous generations. As the United States establishes itself as a superpower, the need for politics becomes less important to the citizens. Also, we are experiencing a shift in focus to developing more technology and building

United States v. Nixon and Clinton v. Jones should have had the same outcome from the Supreme Court. Both, former President 's violated the law and wanted to use presidential privileges to dismiss their cases. In the United States v. Nixon, the Court had the right to order the President to relinquish the tapes to Congress to use as evidence for the trial against the seven members held accountable. Those accused were owed a duty by the Court to be given a fair and speedy trial. In the Clinton v. Jones case, the Court should have not granted the former President Clinton immunity because the general public needs to realize that not even the President can violate the law and get away with it. I agree with the Supreme Court on placing emphasizes on keeping the presidential power in check but respecting the doctrine of separation of powers. The Court has the power to hear cases that involve federal questions because the

The United States is a constitutional republic with a representative democracy, the political system consists of three branches of government; Executive, Legislative, and Judicial. The Supreme Court established under the Judiciary Act of 1789 is an integral part of America’s political system, which plays an important role in the checks and balances between the three branches of Government. The Supreme Court’s role in checks and balances was established following the case of Marbury vs. Madison, when the Supreme Court was granted the ability to perform Judicial Review. Over the last two centuries the Supreme Court has further evolved by becoming more involved with civil liberties and individual rights, as well as by changing the way the constitution

many years since it was established. These cases have been decided by a very close vote. Each

In 1803, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Marbury v. Madison. The most important judicial decision in U.S. history, the Supreme Court made itself to be the final authority on the legality of government actions. This changed the federal power to the judicial branch of government. This upset the federalist system. Now unelected officials can dominate public policy.

Over the last decade congressional polarization has increased at alarming rates causing Washington insiders and outsiders alike to worry about the future of American politics and democracy. While Democrats and Republicans on The Hill cannot agree on much, they both acknowledge that the increasing level of polarization in Washington is crippling the entire legislative branch, thereby undermining the greatest democracy in the world. Numerous public opinion polls, over the last few years, have shown that the vast majority of the American public, regardless of party affiliation, disapproves of, and feels unrepresented by, the extremely polarized legislature (Gallup, 2016). However, year after year, despite how many Americans become disgruntled

In the midst of potential war and terror many are worried of what the future holds. This is how the American people felt after the terrible terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon on September 11, 2001. The government had to think fast and make brash decisions to protect our country, and The Patriot Act (during the time) was the best solution. The Patriot Act was one of the fastest acts passed, many government officials were only thinking of the present, and ways to prevent foreign attack. The act has been edited several times over the years due to many mistakes of violating individual’s rights. What exactly is the act? The definition is “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required or Intercept

Americans in general view America as an ideal democracy in which every citizen has a voice and the views of the public have the power to shape the country. It is somewhat ironic, then, that the Constitutional Convention as a whole was mistrustful of democracy. Perhaps the most prominent holder of this opinion was James Madison, who was very vocal about the oppressive results of majority rule. Madison was of the opinion that the best way to ensure liberty was not leave it in the hands of the general public, but rather to split the federal government and allow each of the resulting branches curtail the power of the others. As Madison said in Federalist No. 51, “Ambition must be made to counteract ambition”. Madison’s views on ambition were integrated into the political structure of the country by limiting democratic citizen participation in government and

During Roe v. Wade (1973), the Supreme Court held that a pregnant woman has the fundamental right to privacy in the cases of abortion. This case recognized that the constitutional right to privacy extends a woman’s right to make her own personal medical decisions, including the decision to have an abortion without interference from politicians. Furthermore, it affirms the legality of a woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th amendment to the constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court Case of Roe vs. Wade has made abortion legal in America. The ruling was that babies are not legal “persons”; from that point on, they have had no rights or protection under Constitution. A woman should have a right to make decisions that involve her own body.

Rosenberg puts forth two views of how the Supreme Court's achieves the effects it does: the "Dynamic Court" and the "Constrained Court". The Dynamic Court view maintains that the United States Supreme Court is indeed capable of effecting widespread change. The Constrained Court view holds that unless certain constraints and conditions imposed upon the Court by the Constitution, the Congress, the public, and other factors are overcome, the Court is unable to accomplish significant change. Rosenberg supports his claims by analyzing specific court decisions, namely Brown v. Board of Education (1954) and Roe v. Wade (1973). Rosenberg condenses three constraints he sees on judicial efficacy that are built into the American legal system: the limited nature of constitutional rights, the lack of judicial independence, and the judiciary’s limited enforcement powers (Rosenberg 2008, pg.

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

Polarization in politics refers to a sharp division of political attitudes as a party, into opposing parties. Partisan polarization over the past thirty years has negatively affected Congress’s ability to govern. Because of this polarization of the parties, Congress is now divided and practically dysfunctional. Similar voting between the Republicans and the Democrats was common through the 1980’s, but in the 1990’s the parties became ideologically distant with a decline of a center ground and began pulling away from each other. The main causes of this polarization are that Republicans have become more consistently conservative while Democrats have become more consistently liberal. This change happened as the partisan makeup of the House

The polarization of the political system in America infects the decision making and voting of politicians and Americans. Logical political decision making of political officials and Americans have been clouded by ideological viewpoints which does not logically increase the United States well being (Wilson pg 7). The political powers lack the efficient clarity in order to expand the growth of society fundamentally. Each political party has its own regime and viewpoint of what is to be of the country we all dwell in. This fog in the vision of these parties withstands a fine judgement in the development of the United States as a whole. This strains the movement of the United States and misrepresents the problems that should be extinguished as

Obergefell v. Hodges is most popularly referred to as the Supreme Court case for same-sex marriage. It is one of the many cases related to the topic of same-sex marriage being a constitutional right. In this specific case James Obergefell and John Arthur filed a lawsuit against the state of Ohio to allow the state to recognize their marriage on death certificates. Obergefell and Arthur were married on the tarmac of the Baltimore-Washington International Airport in Maryland by Arthur’s aunt, Paulette Roberts, on July 11, 2013. Sadly, Arthur died from amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) just months into their marriage on October 22, 2013. Under the current Ohio law, Obergefell was not considered Arthur’s spouse on his death certificate. Obergefell

In his Farewell Address, George Washington warned Americans about the effects of political polarization, saying,“One of the expedients of party to acquire influence, within particular districts, is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts.” Polarization is the division into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs. The political gap between Democrats and Republicans has been a growing problem but has seemed to get increasingly worse in recent years. Although the two-party system can help create balance within