Explain Why Is The Court's Absence Of Judicial Enforcement

Great Essays
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. A bureaucrat is free to design a policy within broad guidelines, but if it drifts too far away from the legislature’s intent, Congress can rescind it by passing a resolution. Presidents realize that Congress is more willing to relax control when it knows it can easily reassert its preferences if it disagrees with the bureaucracy’s implementation of a policy. By continuing to honor these statutory provisions, designed to create more flexible principal-agency relations, the
…show more content…
When the elected branches have decided on a course of action-even on controversial issues-they usually prevail. However, the absence of enforcement authority has allowed Congress and the president at times to ignore Supreme Court rulings. Presidents realize that Congress is more willing to relax control when it knows it can easily reassert its preferences if it disagrees with the bureaucracy’s implementation of a policy. By continuing to honor these statutory provisions, designed to create more flexible principal-agency relations, the elected branches have colluded informally to “overrule” the Supreme Court’s verdict on the unconstitutionality of the legislative veto. Several provisions of the Constitution equip Congress and the president with the power to rein in the Supreme Court when they disagree with its decisions. Article III allows Congress to set the jurisdiction of the Court and to create lower

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    In most Supreme Court cases, the majority opinion usually sets the precedence for future cases and the concurrence has little to do with precedence. However, in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer Justice Jackson’s concurrence creates a three-tiered system for contested Presidential acts. Each tier gives the Court a reasonable idea how to determine whether or not the President’s act was constitutional or not. The first tier is the President’s highest amount of power. It combines his actions and the actions Congress has delegated to him.…

    • 803 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This paper will address the extensive debate regarding presidential powers and the fact that, though unwise and poor law, the War Powers Resolution is not unconstitutional. In order to determine whether or not the War Powers Resolution intrudes too deeply on standing presidential power, it is first necessary to identify the legitimate executive prerogative that the Congress may have infringed upon. Opponents of the War Powers Resolution make a serious argument on intrusiveness regarding only one executive prerogative, the President's power as "Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States”, which is said…

    • 487 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It established the power of judicial review in Marbury v. Madison (1803)” (Lenz & Holman, 98). The significance of this case has since established a model of the Judicial Branch when reviewing or declaring unconstitutional actions by the Legislative and Executive Branches. This set the precedence that the Judicial Branch’s power equals its parallel branches, “an equal in power to the Congress and the president.…

    • 547 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The framers of the U.S. Constitution were greatly concerned about the fact that the president could amass undue power. Over the years, however, presidential power grew much further. This paper attempts to explain the reasons for this expansion as they are expressed in historical contexts, legal precedents, and political developments. To that effect, identify arguments so applied that the evolving nature of presidential authority can be understood. It is for this reason that the framers of the Constitution set up the checks and balances system to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful.…

    • 621 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Article III covered judiciary. With everything else almost finished in the Constitution, the meaning for Article III was left open for interpretation. In 1789, Congress passed the Judiciary Act, which established the federal court system, but did not specify the number of justices. Although the early chief justices didn’t have a huge impact in the direction…

    • 571 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    H-1B Visa Reform Analysis

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Along with checks and balances, this article reminds me of our discussion in class about power, and which branch we believed to be the most powerful. At a first glance, one can guess that the executive branch ultimately holds the most power. Contrary to that, this article presents a strong example to how the legislative branch can prove to be more powerful, or have more influence, especially in terms of law making. “And ultimately, experts say that key elements of the program, including the number of the visas that get issued, are written into statute, meaning Congress holds the power to change…

    • 383 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the article published by Anna Harvey and Barry Friedman, they conducted research to discover whether or not the court was constrained or unconstrained. The researched contained six theories: the floor median theory, in which the Court adhered to the median of Congress’ floor as the House and Senate medians were pivotal to their decisions; the committee gatekeeping model, in which committees control which legislation reaches the Congress floor; majority party (gatekeeping/median) models, in which majority party medians are more influential than the entirety of Congress’ medians or committees; and the veto-filibuster model, in which the possibility of a presidential veto and seniority filibusters influence decisions. Harvey and Friedman focused…

    • 394 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The overall tone of this article is objective because Charles Krauthammer states how the checks and balances perform well in today’s America. He brings up facts and events that support his claim of its performance. He states an example where the checks and balances perform well, “However you feel about the merits of the policy itself or the merits of the constitutional reasoning of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the fact remains: The president proposed and the courts disposed.” Krauthammer wants the audience’s attention brought to the facts, instead of politically biased opinions. Transitioning to a different tone, the author implements an outspoken tone.…

    • 169 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Two Presidencies Theory

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Because the president’s requests are not always fulfilled, it may seem that the executive branch itself checks the president’s power. However, the president’s demands remain supreme in his/her branch; rebellious members of the…

    • 876 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Democrat Huey Long, an outspoken American politician regarded as the “best populist”1 who denounced the wealth inequality among the rich and the poor, has seen his fair share of triumphs and victories throughout his term as Louisiana 's Governor and U.S. Senator. Under his leadership, he helped the “distressed” by supporting beneficial programs, such as providing free school textbooks to children, all at such a high price. With spurring controversy concerning the way he ran his own “political machine,”1 much debate has risen as to whether his own personal ambitions to consolidate all political power in his hands was blinding him from the intended purpose in serving in government. America’s experience with the “defender of the friendless”1 has justified how the initial Framers were able to concentrate power among a system of separated institutions and not just within the hands of potential “populist demagogues.” No framer offered such unique insight into the writing of the Constitution…

    • 1574 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    To maintain the strength of the Judicial Branch having a strong system to provide checks and balances of the other branches of government, there should be a certain level of independence for the Judicial Branch. The Judicial Branch often has the last say in matters regarding judicial review, and because of this, they should be able to operate independently from the other two branches and serve as the final say in these matters. According to Padovano, Sgarra, & Fiorino, (2003), the judiciary is generally better positioned to check such unlawful behavior then voters, since he has access to much better information than they do. Voters that often want a bigger say in these rulings are not always the best options for keeping a strong checks and balances for the highest level of decision making that occurs in the judicial review process. A certain level of independence to the Judicial Branch can allow the certainty of a strong separation of powers and checks and balance system that cannot be controlled by the very parts of government it is trying…

    • 834 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The separation of powers is a feature of political philosophy adopted by the American constitutional framers in an effort to ensure the liberty of the people through a balance of power between departments and governments. Contemporary jurisprudence concerning the treatment of the separation of powers is characterized by the dichotomous schools of "Formalism" and "Functionalism", with the former operating under strict lines and deduction and the latter operating through normative balancing tests and inductioni. The question of which approach is more appropriate to use, and when, remains a matter of disputation. Citing the thoughts of the founding fathers as well as relevant Commerce Clause and separation of powers cases, I argue that a functionalist…

    • 1005 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    J. Cecelia Shaulis April 13, 2015 Pols-Y 211 Dalecki Exam 3- Miranda v. Arizona One of the biggest players in law interpretation and policy-making is the judiciary system. While the other two branches of government have some control over the judiciary system through checks and balances, the federal courts have a great deal of power in the form of judicial review. Judicial review is the authority of the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Understanding the relationship between the president and congress is key in understanding American politics. Congress and the president cannot avoid engaging with one another, with a constitutional set up that demands they work together constructively. Congress has its roles to play in policy making as does the president. The president and congress are given certain powers in the constitution, that power is divvied up, so that neither one of these branches has too much power at one time (Fisher 2007). The founders of the constitution were very distrustful of the presidency and feared if the president was given too much power it would lead to demagogy (Dickinson 2008).…

    • 1004 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the final analysis, the Court’s judicial “activism” has been terribly misguided. Instead of creating constitutional “penumbras” in Griswold, the Court should have upheld the limits on corporate expenditures in Citizens United. Instead of inventing a right to abortion in Roe, the Court should have upheld aggregate limits on individual contributions in McCutcheon. Instead of defining “liberty” in the most broad and unworkable terms in Planned Parenthood, the Court should have held that the Presentment Clause was ambiguous and therefore upheld the Line Item Veto Act in Clinton. This type of “activism” by the Court would have strengthened democracy, promoted bottom-up lawmaking, made elected officials more accountable to the people, and enabled government to work for the people, not simply the powerful.…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays