ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN THE PRESENT SCENARIO: JUDICIAL ACTIVISM OR OVERREACH?
ABSTRACT
The Judicial Activism has been attacked by many parliamentarians and experts in the recent times referring it as overreach of judicial power. There have been various instances where judiciary has extended its power from interpreting the law to law making. The debate arose when judiciary upheld much legislation as unconstitutional. The question is can judiciary decide against the legislation enacted by majority of parliamentarians who are elected by majority of people.
In this paper the author has dealt with the judiciary’s endorsement of counter majoritarianism and its significance. Also the paper underlies the role of judiciary and the judicial trend in
…show more content…
Its function is not only to dispense justice but also to protect rights of its citizens. It on the whole is the guardian of the constitution. The Constitution has laid down the power, duty and functions of the Judiciary.
With the passage of time, there came a vast change in the judicial trend. The judiciary has widened its power from literal and conservative approach of delivering justice to act suo moto. The increase in the power of the judiciary is not seen as a threat to the majoritarianism, but it is a response to the ineffectiveness of the legislature and other organs of the democracy.
After independence, judiciary was much seen into the literal interpretation of the law and the statute and dispense justice considering the Nehruvian thought. During this period only it gave many decisions against the government for example in the Fundamental Rights’ case. During the late 60’s and early 70’s, judiciary was standing in the way of Mrs. Indiara Gandhi’s Government, striking down the bank’s nationalisation, abolition of privy purses etc. From 1950-1975 i.e. before Maneka Gandhi’s case, judiciary had a very restricted
On June 2, 1961, some items stolen from Bay Harbor Pool Room, such as five dollars and a few bottles of beer and soda. Henry Cook told the police that he had seen Clarence Gideon walk out of the pool hall with a bottle and his pockets filled with coins, then got into a taxi and left. Gideon was later taken to court, and when he asked for an attorney to defend him he was told that in the state of Florida,you can only be appointed an attorney if you are charged with a capital offense. Since he was only charged with breaking and entering,burglary,and the intent to commit petty larceny,he was not provided one. He did his best to represent himself in the case, but was found guilty and sentenced to 5 years in the state prison.
The Marbury v. Madison case, a Supreme Court case held in 1803, was the first time a law was ever declared unconstitutional. This case gave Congress as much power as the other branches. The Marbury v. Madison case gave the court the power of Judicial Review, this is why it is one of the most important cases in Supreme Court history. Democratic Republicans, Thomas Jefferson and Aaron Burr, won the election of 1800 and the Democratic Republicans ran Congress. The Supreme Court, however, was run by Federalist, and John Adams wanted to keep it that way.
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.
Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, an advocate for civil rights, has often said while in the face of adversity, “Fight for the things you care about but do so in a way that will lead others to join you” (Alter). Ambitious as she is, her inaccurate depiction in the media contributes to her difficulty in pursuing this ideal. This misrepresentation attempts to both discredit and disregard her personality and accomplishments. Throughout her life, however, Ginsburg experienced far greater calamities than her perception in the media including significant events involving her upbringing. These hardships, while contributing to her anguish, led her to develop advances in character which later allowed her to pursue her beliefs and encourage
The problem of excessive power in state legislature is rooted in the people themselves. Through the multiplicity and mutability of state laws, individuals discovered they
Living in America is a privilege considering all of the rights we, U.S. citizens are given. These rights include freedom of speech, freedom of press, trial by jury, right to bare arms, right to vote and so many more basic things people should be given. But back in the colonial era the colonists didn’t have any of these rights that they thought were “unalienable rights” meaning every person should have them and they can't be taken from us, so they fought for those rights. And because of this war we now have so many rights that we take granted of every day and love. Some of these important rights also include the right to a capitalistic economy and a fair chance at wealth and gain.
The Supreme Court is one of the most important and influential pieces of our government. Their major role is to ensure American citizens are promised equal justice under the law. With this high of a stance a major question is asked, does this court carry too much power? The Supreme Court consists of nine justices, chief justice, and eight others. Once appointed by the president, justices work for a lifetime unless told otherwise.
The final accusation basically restated previously mentioned fails to comply. The state argued that the business continued to operate under illegality due to the law previously set. It was the main argument for the state, yet was clearly set to deter the activity of the organization. The organization responded with a truthful statement.
Panel Discussion on the U.S. Supreme Court Vacancy Antonin Gregory Scalia who is one of the associate justice of United States. Supreme Court, dead on February 13 this year. Scalia was appointed as a justice by President Ronald Reagan from 1986 until his death in 2016. Before his death, the conservatives in the Supreme Court in the United States take up five seats and the liberals got four seats there, which means the conservatives take advantages in the Supreme Court of U.S. Now, many conservatives hope the vacancy should be appointed after the presidential election, while the liberals support that Obama appoints a new justice as soon as possible.
The Court’s effectiveness relies on the institutional capacities as well as the ruling’s popularity. When lower-court judges comply with Supreme Court decisions, rulings can have a substantial effect on social policies, as in the case
“There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right. ”(Martin Luther King, Jr.) Most people were racist but now since the civil rights have been established most have stopped being racist and moved on. Three supreme court case decisions influenced the civil rights movements by letting more and more poeple know what the Supreme Court was doing to African Americans,and of the unfair him crow laws:(Dred Scott v. Sanford,Plessy v. Ferguson,Brown v. Board of Education). Dred Scott v. Sanford Is a case that most people felt that Dred Scott had an unfair charge against him.
The conflict between authority and disobedience has stayed relevant since Adam and Eve chose to disobey in the Garden of Eden. Since this moment, every civilization has dealt with this relationship. Egyptians faced the exodus of their Israelite slaves from their land, Romans fought with the slave Spartacus who raised an army to fight against the Roman empire, and in the eighteenth century, the French government had the challenge of its civilians revolting against their authority. The balance between authority and disobedience represents a pendulum relationship. When a pendulum swings to one side, it eventually swings to the opposite side with an equal amount of force; thus, the more authority executes its rights on a civilian, the more the
Civil liberties are rights guaranteed to citizens in the Constitution that the government cannot interfere with, however, in the name of national security, they do. The government sometimes finds it necessary for Americans to give up some of their basic rights to keep the nation protected, but many people find this unnecessary. A law-abiding citizen’s extremely personal information should not be essential to finding terroristic threats within this society. Under no circumstances should an American citizen’s civil liberties be violated in a time of war or crisis, because those are assured rights that are most valuable to their freedom during national conflicts.
Judicial selection is an intriguing topic as there are multiple ways that judges take their seat on the bench. The United States Constitution spells out how federal judges are selected and leaves it up to the individual states to establish their means for selecting judges. In federal courts, judges are appointed and it varies between appointment and election for state courts. The purpose of this paper is to examine the differences between appointments and elections (as well as the multiple types of elections) and to give an opinion as to which is the better alternative. Federal judges are appointed by the President of the United States and are confirmed on the advice and consent of the United States Senate.
Malaysian judiciary refers to the Malaysian court system. It is an independent body separate from the legislative and executive arms of government. The role of courts is to ensure the law and order are followed, that justice is done, and criminals are punished. The head of the judiciary is the Chief Justice.