Site Loader

            The United States government has
upheld a federal system where certain powers are distributed between the three
branches of government: legislative, executive and judicial. The Constitution does
not give the judicial branch as much enumerated powers as the other branches,
but it is necessary to make sure the other branches are making decisions that
are constitutional.

The
case Marbury v. Madison gave the judicial
branch a new-found power that made it one of the most influential branches of
the government. Even though this case was not brought to the Supreme Court to
establish a new power, that is what happened, making the case very important
and famous in history. In the case Marbury
v. Madison, the Supreme Court ruled against Marbury stating that they were
not the correct court to make a decision. This case is significant because it
was the first time the Supreme Court found another branch acting wrong and unconstitutional.
It was with this case that the Supreme Court established a new power: judicial
review. It allowed the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional. Though
this was already an enumerated power the judicial branch had, judicial review
gave the Supreme Court the necessary power they needed to keep the legislative
and executive branches in check. This new-found power contributed to the idea
of checks and balances, giving the judicial branch more authority to control
the other branches than what the Constitution states.  

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

The
creation of judicial review gave the Supreme Court authority to directly
interfere with laws and decisions the legislative branch makes, essentially
deciding the fate of laws given to the American public. For being a branch that
does not associate with the public, judicial review gave the Supreme Court the
necessary amount of power to dictate what laws and regulations the American
people must follow. 

One
question that arose from this case was: should the Supreme Court be given the power
to make decisions over social and political problems that the American public
is facing? The Supreme Court, is part of the branch that least connects with
the people. Rarely are justices from the Supreme Court found in public or in
the media. In fact, they are hidden away from the public eye. They are not
elected by the people like the President and Congress. Yet, sometimes they are
the ones that make decisions on laws that affect the American public. Is this
reasonable?

The
Constitution is a vague document and in many cases, it is not very clear on
what it states. For this fact alone, the courts are very important in our
system of government. The Constitution does not explicitly state anything about
race, gender, ethnicities, etc. That is why it is necessary to have a source of
power that can interpret what the Constitution is trying to say when deciding
if passing a certain law would be the best thing for the American public. When justices
are appointed, they are appointed for life. Having justices that serve for life
would help the court be less bias and more critical because the justices do not
need to be liked by the American public or other branches of government to keep
their position as a justice. Having the same people would also keep the
ideologies, preferences and values more constant creating less disagreements as
well as keeping the Constitution as original as possible.

Since
the Supreme Court does not have to make decisions according to how the public
may react they have more opportunities to be more critical and make decisions
based upon their interpretation of the Constitution and the wellbeing of the
country. The legislative branch creates bills that later the executive branch
signs into law, but they always do this thinking about public opinion. They are
more prone to make decisions that only benefit those who will reelect them into
office. On the other hand, the Supreme Court has no obligation to take opinions
from the American public. Consequently, in many cases having an objective
opinion made solely of interpreting law is fairer for everyone. Justices “do
not make the rules; they apply them” (Roberts, 2005, slide 50). Giving the
Supreme Court the authority to agree or disagree on applying laws makes the
government more controlled and fair. It develops a way of creating laws that
are not formed to benefit one certain group, but a majority of the country. The
job of the Supreme Court is to keep our Constitution valued and applied among
all other things. 

Post Author: admin

x

Hi!
I'm Erica!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out