Federalists and Anti-Federalists both have an arguable amount of supporters. I am in favor of the Anti-Federalist point of view. The Anti-Federalists believed the Constitution granted too much power to the federal courts, at the expense of the state and local courts. They argued that the federal courts would be too far away to provide justice to the average citizen. In addition the Constitution allows the government too much power,does not provide for a republican government, and it also does not include a Bill of Rights, which is vital.
A statute may be voided for vagueness if it is determined a reasonable person cannot comprehend what activity is being prohibited (Hall, 2014). Additionally, the statute may be voided if the penalty for the activity is not clearly defined so that a reasonable person could discern the penalties for the prohibited actions. This can become a due process issue, by not giving full disclosure to the people explaining the action prohibited, moreover, not detailing the punishment for the action. The void-for-vagueness doctrine provides a protection of the people, requiring that laws be detailed to avoid police and prosecutors from having infinite power over determining what individuals should be charged. The void-for-vagueness doctrine most commonly applies to criminal cases.
The decision of Adkins v. Children’s Hospital is overruled, and the judgment of the Supreme Court of Washington is affirmed. Concurrences/Dissents Justice Sutherland dissented: the question of this case should not have received fresh consideration because the “economic conditions have changed,” the meaning of the Constitution does not change with the ebb and flow of economic events. The only way to remedy a situation where the Constitution stands in the way of legislation is to amend the Constitution not to use the power of amendment under the guise of interpretation. Judges are constrained by the nature of their office and the Court must act as one unit.
Separation of Powers is the division of powers into three branches. In Document B it explains that the legislative branch makes laws, the executive branch enforces laws, and the judicial branch passes them. This evidence explains how the Constitution guards against tyranny because it separates the powers of the government and it makes sure that no branch has more power than the other.
In essence, she cares so little about anything that she shows no feelings about the fact a person she loved getting murdered. Her gets perfectly stated by Nick: “They were careless people, Tom and Daisy—they smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made” (Fitzgerald 179). Daisy feels like that because she has so much money and is part of old money, no action can impact her. No matter what bad deed she does, people will fix it for her and she will face no
In Federalist 51, he focuses on how the Constitution divides the power of the government into three branches and so no one branch would have too much power. This was done by using the checks and balances system. Madison believes that each branch should be, for the most part, independent, but, to avoid any branches from abusing its power, no branch should have too much power in choosing the members of another. He says that to follow this rule strictly, the people of the United States would choose all members of all branches, but difficulties would arise as the people may not be aware of the best qualifications for each position. So, the branches check one another and the people elect the members other than in the judicial branch, whose members are chosen by the executive branch.
Judges in every state must adhere to these and abide by them. Thus, it is important to our country because it decides if a state’s laws are constitutionality sound or if it is contradictory to the U.S. Constitution in any manner. We have the highest court in our land, the Supreme Court, to decide these issues
The federal government does not have full, complete power of the government, due to the fact the federal government has to power to tax, regulate commerce, and put laws into place if and only if laws are so called “necessary and proper.” Another thing was for each branch of government to have their own separation of powers and check and balance other branches of government. Either though, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists did not agree on ideas, the Constitution is a document of the general compromise between the two political parties. The weakness of the Articles of the Confederation was resolved through the compromise of the Federalists and Anti-federalists political
Because in a true democracy, it is the responsibility of the citizens to disobey the laws that aren’t truly aiding in the progressive nature of society. A democracy can’t be effective without active participation. With that, Martin Luther King Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail is a cornerstone in how we should approach the discussion of whether it is or isn’t reasonable to disobey a law. King agrees with St. Augustine in that “an unjust law is no law at all.” This enforces the idea that an unjust law is virtually not present because it is inevitably meant to be broken.
If Rosenberg is correct, this does not mean that Hamilton’s argument that the Court is the “least dangerous branch” is also correct. Rosenberg’s view that courts can only produce significant social change given weak barriers and constraints does not by itself qualify Hamilton’s argument. There are other ways that the Court exerts influence in the political system other than promoting social change. There are three branches of government under the Constitution: (1) Executive, (2) Legislative, and (3) Judicial. The framers of the Constitution intended for the three branches to interact through a system of checks and balances, the mechanisms through which each branch is able to participate in and influence the activities of the other branches.
Any additions to the powers listed are unconstitutional and potentially dangerous. The constitution in of itself establishes a government with limited powers. Such interpretation ensures that judges and lawmakers will not become tyrannical
41. Mapp v. Ohio (1961): The Supreme Court ruling that decided that the fourth amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures must be extended to the states. If there is no probable cause or search warrant issued legally, the evidence found unconstitutionally will be inadmissible in the courtroom and not even considered when pressing charges. The exclusionary rule, in this case, is a right that will restrict the states and not just the federal government, including the states in more of the federal rights as outlined in the Constitution.
My witnesses are credible individuals. Ms. Campbell was a worker at Snoopy’s where my client was killed. She was fearful for her life. Mr. Jeffery McCormick was the first on the scene and saw my client first hand lying on the floor of the restaurant dead.
In Federalist Paper #51, James Madison decided to describe the structure that the government would apply to make liberty available. In James Madison’s mind, each branch should be independent and not dependent. I believe that Madison is saying that not one branch should depend on the other two branches no matter what the situation is. In terms of the branches, not one branch should have too much power in selecting members for the other two branches. For example, if the legislative branch had a lot of power in selecting the members of the judicial branch then they could corrupt the judicial branch to be useless.