• Home Page
  • Argument Against Judicial Reviews

Argument Against Judicial Reviews

Improved Essays
Show More
Abstract
Judicial review allows judges to review the lawfulness of a decision or action by a public body exercising a public role. Judicial review is concerned with how the law is being applied, along with the procedures followed. It is known to be one of the most effective and powerful institutions capable of convincing a public body to review a decision and to a certain extent force them to take different actions. The power granted to judicial courts has allowed emerging controversy on behalf of many public segments since it is perceived as a threat to democracy and the legitimacy of the government and the according constitution. Therefore, questions like what are the reasons that drive governments to intentionally constrain themselves by …show more content…
The paper sheds light on the power within the judicial system to protect rights and shape a platform for the public. Moreover, the sections framing the general concepts highlight the essence and nature of judicial reviews, not to replace legislation, but to compliment and separate the degrees of authority they both have to complete the system. Accordingly, this paper does not compare and contrast legislation and judicial reviews nor does it aim to overthrow legislative power, but instead it serves the purpose of explaining how judicial reviews are in fact democratic, capable of fulfilling legal responsibilities without becoming an alternative to governmental …show more content…
The first key argument presented states that people have a “right to an explanation and a right to challenge any infringement of their rights”. Consequently, they reason that the right to an explanation unwraps the likelihood of reconsideration to how the state has treated “victims of infringement” . Furthermore, the authors justify that only a judicial body with the power of review can recognize the right to an explanation because the judiciary is suited to address the explanatory requirements. The argument is then concluded to clarify that judicial review will most likely follow legislative deliberation. This argument restructures the first point on the characteristics that judiciaries

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    C Parliamentary Sovereignty V Bikie Analysis
    • 1010 Words
    • 4 Pages

    C Parliamentary Sovereignty V Bikie Analysis

    However, judges make decisions based on public perception, and thus this upholds the independence of the judiciary, making decisions with complete discretion. The independence of the judiciary is protected through s 72 of the Constitution, which protects the tenure and remuneration of the federal judges. With the guarantee and security of tenure, judges are not held accountable to external opinion and public perception. This means that the federal judges do not need to be threatened or adhere to the Executive or the general public, as it is only the Governor-General that can discharge them. The functions that were given to the Chapter III courts in Kable could not be conferred so as to diminish public confidence.…

    • 1010 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Charters As Living Trees Summary
    • 1773 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Charters As Living Trees Summary

    Charters (or Bills) of Rights and Judicial Review are twinned and often inseparable in the academic controversy surrounding their use and implementation. In Constitutions as Living Trees: An Idiot Defends, Waluchow attempts to defeat critics of Charters and Judicial Review by reframing the desirability of the two concepts in a manner that he argues is compatible with modern democracy. While a broad spectrum of previous conceptions of Charters fail to overcome the arguments set against them by the group Waluchow terms ‘the Critics’, he claims that his argument offers a fresh view of the Charter ― the jumping off point from which he aims to make his defence . He then begins to lay the footwork for his new conception of Charters, covering four…

    • 1773 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    R V. Keegstra Case Analysis
    • 1338 Words
    • 6 Pages

    R V. Keegstra Case Analysis

    The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court in Canada, the final court of appeal, and the last legal resort for all litigants; therefore, the Supreme Court of Canada decisions are the ultimate expression and application of Canadian law (Supreme Court of Canada tour). The landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Canada in the R v. Keegstra case regarding the freedom of expression portrays the theoretical concepts behind the court’s ruling as it is the job of the court to deliver a fair decision to the parties involved, as well as a decision that maintains law and order in society. The R v. Keegstra ruling contains insights from the consensus theory and the labelling theory, as the decision of the court was in the interest of the public. To better understand a criminal law case and come up with a conclusion, the theory used must have a valid structure and must follow the rules of critical thinking and logic (Boyd, Cartwright and Heidt, 2015: 120). Also, the purpose of the criminal law must be understood as criminal law serves a purpose, which takes into account some theoretical aspects of the consensus theory and…

    • 1338 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Great Essays

    Explain Why Is The Court's Absence Of Judicial Enforcement
    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Explain Why Is The Court's Absence Of Judicial Enforcement

    7. Why is the Court’s absence of judicial enforcement important? The absence of enforcement authority has allowed Congress and the president at times to ignore Supreme Court rulings. Congress and presidents have good reasons for favoring this approach that allows Congress to delegate lawmaking discretion to the executive branch without surrendering ultimate control.…

    • 1201 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
    Read More
  • Decent Essays

    How Does Judicial Review Undermine Democracy
    • 204 Words
    • 1 Pages

    How Does Judicial Review Undermine Democracy

    In return by protecting their liberty the judicial review allows them to participate in the government and in return participate in the democracy. In addition judicial review helps protect…

    • 204 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Review: The Supreme Court
    • 1183 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Judicial Review: The Supreme Court

    “Everything can change at any moment, suddenly and forever” (“Paul”). American author Paul Auster expressed the famous idea of one moment shaping everything else in the future. On February 24, 1803, one mere Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison, changed the course of American history. From this ruling, the Supreme Court gained judicial review: the authority to give their opinions on the constitutionality of laws. This positively impacted America because it prohibited the government from abusing the Constitution.…

    • 1183 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Activism Anand Analysis
    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Judicial Activism Anand Analysis

    Part B: Article Selected: "The Truth about Canadian Judicial Activism" To begin the article, Anand states that the topic of judicial activism over the years has generated great debate. In recent years, many have denied that there is such a thing called judicial activism, for example retired Supreme Court Justice John Minister John Mayor once said: “there is no such thing as judicial activism in Canada”. As a result, many feel that the debate has allowed excessive judicial defense, resulting in legislatures and officials to act without any inspection of state actions involving vulnerable minorities. Anand moves on to provide a basic summary of the definition of what judicial activism is, and defines it as “the tendancy for judges to make, as opposed to…

    • 995 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Compare And Contrast The Techniques Of Judicial Selection
    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Compare And Contrast The Techniques Of Judicial Selection

    For several years there has been a struggle to balance independence and accountability in the judicial selection. “Judges are important policy makers and are selected or retained through popular elections,…

    • 511 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    The Judicial Review Process
    • 868 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Judicial Review Process

    The founding fathers of the Constitution did not want the government to have too much power in any one agency, so they divided the government into the executive, legislative and judicial branch to avoid tyranny. The Supreme Court is the authority of the judicial branch and the highest of all courts, which can examine the laws and decisions made by Congress and declares them unconstitutional. This does not mean that the Supreme Court has unlimited power because each branch partakes in checks and balance in providing a government of the people. The role of the Supreme Court is to not only to ensure the people equal justice under the Constitution but to also provide as checks and balance within the government. Since the Constitution is complex,…

    • 868 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Courts Are Powerful Agents In Achieving Social Change By Gerald Rosenberg Analysis
    • 1262 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Courts Are Powerful Agents In Achieving Social Change By Gerald Rosenberg Analysis

    Professor Gerald Rosenberg, in his analysis on whether courts are powerful agents in achieving social change, highlights two main court views: The Dynamic Court view and the Constrained Court view. The Dynamic Court view holds that courts are successful agents in producing social change, while the constrained court view argues for the opposite (Rosenberg, 2). The American civil rights movement was an important demonstration in Rosenberg’s argument of the Constrained Court view (Rosenberg, 9). The Constrained court view maintains that courts cannot produce social change. In my response, I will deconstruct his court views to understand whether courts can produce significant social reform.…

    • 1262 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Roles Of Judicial Judges
    • 1093 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Roles Of Judicial Judges

    judiciary is not dependent on any government to make decisions and their primary aim is to protect all citizens based on law. It is for this reason that judges are placed on a separate branch under the constitution. The role of the courts as resolver of disputes, interpreter of the law and defender of the Constitution and the Charter, requires that they be separate in authority and function from all other participants in the justice…

    • 1093 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Review: The Supreme Court
    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Judicial Review: The Supreme Court

    The Supreme Court, under Article 3 of the constitution, only had original jurisdiction over certain cases. It was after the prominent Marbury vs Madison case that they gave themselves the power of Judicial Review (Judicial Process, Page 415). Judicial Review is the power granted by the Supreme Court itself to review and overturn any acts of Congress, and to declare laws unconstitutional. This gives the Supreme Court a certain degree of power over states and Congress and also gives them the power to have the final say on the interpretation of the Constitution. I believe that their authority is advantageous but at the same time, although a law may be nullified, they don’t necessarily have the power to ensure that it is carried out.…

    • 835 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    Importance Of Separation Of Powers In Australia
    • 1362 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Importance Of Separation Of Powers In Australia

    On the other hand the executive, has a right to choose to dissolve the national council, and the laws that have been passed can be checked by the constitutional court. Legislative has influence over judiciary by passing laws which courts have to follow. The reparation of powers is an important factor of the rule of law, and is made important in the constitution. Furthermore, the distinctions between the powers is reflected in the functions must not be exercised by one person. As an example, the president cannot at the same time be a member of the national council, or a judge who is a minister.…

    • 1362 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More
  • Improved Essays

    The Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Judicial Branch
    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Strengths And Weaknesses Of The Judicial Branch

    Throughout the United States government 's history, one thing remains the same, the three branches of government are as important as each other in keeping the nation thriving. Each with their unique set of strengths and weaknesses, the Judicial Branch is one that comes to mind when thinking of having the most powerful strength, proving a system of checks and balances to the other government branches. The Judicial Branch is responsible for reviewing the constitutionality of the actions of the government, according to Fine & Levin-Waldman (2016). What this means is, when something is signed into law or actions are taken, the Supreme Court of the United States decides if it follows the rights and laws outlined in the US Constitution. According to…

    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
    Read More
  • Superior Essays

    The Pros And Cons Of Judicial Discretion
    • 796 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The Pros And Cons Of Judicial Discretion

    As already stated, judicial discretion encompasses the freedom that judges are assigned by the legal apparatus within a given jurisdiction. The allowances provided by the law to practice discretion mean that personal opinions are usually injected in the making of judgements in the legal system. As such, discretion leads to unpredictability and discrepancies in the issuing of sentences for similar criminal offences. Discretion is a double-edged sword that carries advantage and disadvantages. The advantage of judicial discretion is that it allows for the consideration of the unique circumstance of each case and apply the legal provisions according to these guidelines.…

    • 796 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
    Read More

Related Topics

Ready To Get Started?
Discover
Company
Follow
©2024 Cram.com
Privacy Policy |  About Ads |  Site Map |  Advertise  | 
  • Cookie Settings