Alexander Hamilton: The Role Of The Judicial Branch

Superior Essays
In the late 1700s, the Federalists Papers, essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay spoke volumes to the colonial citizens. Divided into factions, the Federalists and Anti-federalists had their own views on how the government should be run. Avid supporters of the Constitution, the Federalists made a name for themselves, disguising the fact they were committed to a nationalist government. On the other hand, the Anti-federalists focused more on the true principles of the Revolution. In articles seventy-eight and seventy-nine published under Publis and Brutus, the authors clarified the structure, powers, appointments and independence of the judiciary branch. In this term paper, I will analyze these articles of the Federalists …show more content…
As for the role of the courts in the government, it might be hard to understand because its complete independence is necessary in a limited constitution to interpret the laws (F78). Hamilton explains the judicial branch may be the weakest because it is not involved in the everyday lives of the people. The judiciary is only aware when information is brought to them through the courts. So, Hamilton was right in saying the judicial branch is the middleman to the legislative branch. The courts must declare the sense of the law, which means they play a major role in a law being passed (F78). The Antifederalist argue the judges of the Supreme Court are a vital part in the judiciary branch controlling the legislative branch and if need be, the Supreme Court could resort to determining what the extent of the powers of Congress are (AF 78). Next to permanency in office, otherwise known as tenure nothing could contribute more to the independence of the judges than their support …show more content…
In the Antifederalist articles the comparison to the English monarchy of the tenure of the judge’s position in office, loses a considerable part of their weight when applied to the state and condition of America (AF 78 and 79). The explanation is if officials do not represent the government in an appropriate manner, they will face consequences. (AF 78 and 79) As for those who adhere to the correct behavior will procure their position for life, especially in the early stages of the government (AF 78 and 79). Using good behavior to their judicial offices, in terms of duration is a great point far from being blamed on any account (F 78). Great Britain have proven themselves with this shining aspect of a solid government (F 78) Now with impeachments, officials are subject to be challenged for misbehaviors of high crimes by the House of Representatives, and tried by the Senate (F 79). If the individual is found guilty they may be removed from office and disqualified for going against their governmental integrity (F

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Before the ratification of the constitution, two original political parties fell consistent during the 1700’s, Federalists and Antifederalists. In shorter terms, Federalists wanted a stronger central government to have overall power of the states, rather the Antifederalists wanted something similar to the Articles of Confederation, where the states as individuals, had more power than the central government. Both, although strongly contrasting, contained one main similarity, thirst for the creation of a new country, just with different ideas of how it should function.…

    • 1080 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    One thing was clear during the convention of 1787, there were an astonishing number of viewpoints that clashed wherever they could. The main topic for debate was the distribution of control. Who would make the decisions for the people the state government or national government? The worry was that if the state government had primary control over the people's interests, who would police them? The Federalists wanted to make sure that the state government officials did not influence political policy to further their own interests. In this short essay, I will briefly discuss Elitism and how the Federalist argument for a stronger central government uses the idea of pluralism.…

    • 1282 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Carol Berkin is a professor of History at Baruch College, and she teaches early American and women’s history. A BRILLIANT SOLUTION: Inventing the American Constitution is a book that involves the independence of United States of America. The years after the Rebellion were the greatest years and the most terrible periods. Even if the nation is eminent their newborn liberty, they did not have a strong central administration that would connect them mutually (Berkin, 2002). Berkin amazingly discloses the conflicts and cooperation that describes the outline of the Constitution. She records the growth of the document, the particulars of all articles of the Constitution. She as well shows the profound differences between the states ' rights advocates and Madison 's Federalists such as Edmund Randolph and George Mason of Virginia. Some of these delegates decline to sign the Constitution and pledge to struggle in opposition to its approval in their nation. The arguments presented by Carol Berkins as she analyzes the framing of…

    • 1121 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The Founding Fathers on rights: Comparing the Federalists’ and Anti-Federalists’ views on rights, and what ended up in the Bill of Rights.…

    • 4450 Words
    • 18 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Judicial Dbq Analysis

    • 807 Words
    • 4 Pages

    First of all, in Federalist No. 78, written by Alexander Hamilton in 1788; declares that, “[The] courts were designed to be an intermediate body between the people and the legislature...”(Doc D). In other words, the judges within…

    • 807 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the argument about the ratification of the United States Constitution, both the supporters and the opponents had substantial reasoning for their viewpoints. However, these groups differentiated greatly on what problems were most significant to their arguments. Each group came up with smaller “subgroups” of issues they had with the Constitution or Articles of Confederation. The supporting group of the Constitution was the Federalists, who believed in a strong central government that would better protect and support the new upcoming nation. On the other hand, the opposing group was the Anti-Federalists, who believed power belonged in the states. The Anti-Federalists were led by Thomas Jefferson and an American politician named Patrick Henry, while the Federalists were led by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and John Adams, all key supporters of George Washington.…

    • 993 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Recently gaining independence from Great Britain was a notable achievement for the new country of America, but a great divide in the thoughts and actions that would determine the fate of the government became increasingly uneasy. Two opposing ways of thinking evolved and battled for how we would establish our country: the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. While both seemingly concerned for the well being of the country, the predominant factor that separates Anti-Federalist Mery Otis Warren from Federalist James Madison is the perception they had over the citizens in their relation to the government. James Madison was concerned with the stability a republic could provide, while Mery Otis Warren wanted to ensure that the government was small, secure, and did not become to powerful or aristocratic.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    During the early, immature years of our nation’s history, the interests of north and south, rich and poor, and industry and agriculture were dealt with as compromises, upsetting both sides until two deeply different visions for the country arose. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton believed that our new country’s federal government should be more powerful. However, Hamilton 's views faced strong opposition by many, such as Secretary of State Thomas Jefferson and House Representative James Madison. He believed it more wise to provide more power to individual states. The two emerging parties deemed themselves with names that reflected their most treasured values. The Federalists attached themselves to the flourishing campaign in favor…

    • 1543 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    During the summer of 1787, representatives from each of the thirteen colonial states, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, two starkly contrasting groups of state delegates, had gathered to discuss a new Constitution to replace the failed Articles of Confederation. Namely, the delegates had debated as to whether or not the new ruleset should have taken effect, as they possessed highly dissimilar viewpoints regarding the Constitution. There were several Anti-Federalist arguments against the Constitution’s ratification, alongside numerous counterarguments by the Federalists in its support. Specifically, the Anti-Federalists had been primarily concerned with the federal and state governments of the United States, fearing tyranny and excessive…

    • 1556 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The emotional and dramatic debates of 1787 initiated an event turning change in the structure of the United States government. The passion of James Madison’s ambition to create an equally powered federal government through the division of government branches have set foot to what the modernized American system is seen today. Rakove elaborates in great detail of the trials and errors which the delegates of the 1787 Convention had to endure. However, without the strenuous debates, contemplating opinions, and theoretical views of the Virginia Plan delegates against the New Jersey Plan delegates, the American nation would fail to stand on the strong values of equal government power. From the various attempts to create an organized federal government power and Constitution, the intentions of the delegates of the 1787 Convention were centered upon the values of theory and philosophy rather than…

    • 1142 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    After America’s long journey of seeking freedom from governmental oppression, the newly formed nation was skeptical when it came to the discussion of new government authority. Many Americans were still uneasy about consolidated power, while others were aware of the prevalent national instability caused by the lack thereof. Though, in the end, the Constitution prevailed and has become the cornerstone of American government, the path that led to this enduring document was gradual and filled with apprehension and debate. Both sides of the issue had very clear and valid notions about either their support or opposition to the Constitution, and in the end were able to find common ground through patience and compromise.…

    • 1123 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Apush Dbq Analysis

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Federalist prevailed because they identified the proper path to American prosperity. Centralization is an imperative facet of a successful national government, thus eliminating governmental dissention between states. A sectionalist government was not adequate for the United Sates, a newborn nation requiring unity. The Federalists and Republican debate can be justifiably attributed as the fountainhead of the political party system. The ratification of the Constitution outlines the powers and rights of the government, ensuring the citizens free from oppression and tyranny. Americans’ rights and liberties are overtly expressed through the Bill of Rights. Federalists and Republicans possessed contradicting views of the same document, fueling debate. Key Federalists such as Alexander Hamilton intelligently reformed the American economy, eliminating the national debt. The Federalist Papers strategically expressed the movement’s motivations and ideals, thus bolstering support. More than 200 years later, the Federalist-Antifederalist debate comprised of the same key issues that face our nation…

    • 1179 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The development of the New World as a nation underwent several significant changes to accomplish what it is today. From this, many ideologies and legislations were implemented to unify the thirteen colonies and one of the written laws initiated during the time of development, were the Articles of Confederation. Although the Articles of Confederation were written to provide the colonies with an impression of a united country, the document itself possessed numerous flaws that left the country feeling the opposite. This will be illustrated by reviewing the Congress’ inadequate influence in the approval of legislations, taxation of the states, and foreign policies in the existing colonies during the 18th century.…

    • 1178 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It was agreed upon in the Constitution that “Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed” (Jefferson). By stating this it was absolute that those who were in a position of power are there because the people they over-see. Some of the men behind the support for the Constitution were Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay. Although the Federalist strongly supported this change there were many disagreements from the Anti-Federalist group. The main argument came from those who believed this new Constitution would strengthen government at the expense of its people and independent states. Because of the group’s disagreements, they came to write explanations for their position in essay. These essays came to be known as The Federalist Papers and The Anti-federalist Papers. The Federalist papers had a main reason to convey the interpretation to the new constitution. While the Anti-Federalist Papers was pleading those who still secured their rights to allow discussion over the same document. By reading them, we learn that the Anti-Federalist did not think the new Constitution accurately explained the rights of its…

    • 1678 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    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