Please read over the other students’ responses and then reply to at least one classmate. In your replies identify something you had not previously been aware of or something which challenges you to think differently. 1paragraph.
Classmate response … Q1.I agree with Alexander Hamilton’s statement that the “Judiciary is the Challenging branch of Government.” The court should belong to the judicial organ and implement the judge system different from the general administrative organ. The court is mainly responsible for the trial work. The executive branch does not only have the power to distribute status; the executive branch is also in charge of the military command. And the legislature not only controls the power of money, but also formulates the standards of citizens’ rights and obligations. Judicial power is neither military power nor financial power, neither coercive nor unconscious. Judicial power only has the power of judgment, and in judgment needs the help of the power of administrative organs (Thrower, 2019). So, it is itself vulnerable to erosion and weakest. For example, Federalist No. 78 believed that the judiciary was inherently weak because it could not control the nation’s money or military (Thrower, 2019). In short, the judicial branch has neither financial power nor military power, nor can it control the power and wealth of the society, nor can it take any initiative (Thrower, 2019). So, claim: the judiciary is the weakest branch of government.
Q2. Judicial activism and judicial restraint are opposite sides method. Judicial activism and judicial restraint in the United States are related to the country’s judicial system, and they are a check on the abuse of power by the government or any constitutional body (Sandefur, 2017). Judicial activism is the interpretation of the Constitution to promote contemporary values and conditions. Judicial activism requires judges to exercise their power to correct any injustice, especially when other constitutional bodies do not act (Sandefur, 2017). This means that judicial activism plays an important role in shaping social policies on issues such as the protection of civil rights, public morality, and political injustice (Sandefur, 2017). Judicial constraints, on the other hand, limit a judge’s power to break the law. Under judicial constraints, the courts shall uphold all acts of Congress and state legislatures, unless they violate the national Constitution (Coper.2006). Under judicial constraints, courts usually follow the interpretation of the Constitution by Congress or any other constitutional body (Coper.2006). In addition, judicial restraint and judicial activism have different goals. Judicial restraint helps maintain the balance between the three branches of government: Judicial, executive, and legislative (Coper.2006). In such cases, judges and courts are encouraged to review existing law rather than amend it. And the goal of judicial activism is that it gives the power to overturn decisions. For example, the Supreme Court or appellate Law The court may reverse some previous decisions if they are wrong. This judicial system also acts as a check and balance, preventing the judicial, executive, and legislative branches of government from becoming powerful (Coper.2006).
References
COPER. (2006). Concern about judicial method. Melbourne University Law Review, 30(2), 554–575. https://doi.org/10.3316/agispt.20070642 https://spc-flvc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01FALSC_SPC/1hph3rk/cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A156136088
Sandefur. (2017). Hercules and Narragansett among the Originalists: Examining Tara Smith’s Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System. Reason Papers, 39(2), 8–. https://spc-flvc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01FALSC_SPC/1hph3rk/cdi_gale_infotracmisc_A531467459
Thrower. (2019). Presidential action and the Supreme Court: The case of signing statements. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 31(4), 677–698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0951629819875519 https://spc-flvc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01FALSC_SPC/1hph3rk/cdi_proquest_journals_2314514441
