Judicial disqualification

known, there is a “presumption of honesty and integrity in those serving as adjudicators.” Surely, this presumption of integrity assumes that judges will cabin their policy preferences when deciding cases that involve those preferences, and to assume otherwise is to contend that judges do not have policy preferences, a patently unlikely proposition. Further, the likelihood that ideology mandates recusal diminishes when we are reminded that the Due Process Clause only concerns the “outer boundaries” —the extraordinary cases—of disqualification. Yet, there is nothing extraordinary about a federal judge’s having a preexisting ideology, and thus, there is little reason to believe that due process concerns itself with this ordinary plea for recusal. Second, on the occasions when Tiller has given uncompensated-for speeches at Minnesota Borders fundraising events, The Sierra Club has publicly called Tiller’s “judgment and ethics … terrible,” questioned her judicial neutrality, and plead for her impeachment. Here, there is a fear that Tiller will react to The Sierra Club’s rhetoric in a way that biases her judging. The Court addressed a similar concern in Mayberry v. Pennsylvania (1971), in which two defendants belittled a judge, who then charged the defendants with criminal contempt. The same judge—the one who accused the defendants of contempt—was also the judge who adjudicated the case that arose from his accusation. The Mayberry Court held that the judge’s presence violated…

has no influence over either the sword or the purse”. He also argues that the judiciary merely has the power of judgment, rather than force or will, and that the judiciary depends on the other two branches to support its judgments. However, when the Supreme Court makes a decision, this decision stands since it is deemed “the supreme law of the land”. In Marbury v. Madison, Marshall argued that it is a responsibility of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional legislation in accordance to…

Act of 1801 and setting up a precedent to be used countless more times called judicial review. Marshall was able to come to this conclusion after using the so called Supremacy Clause, which states that “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof [...] shall be the supreme law of the land.” With this small phrase, Marshall…

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…

The supreme court is one of the main pillars of government, whose original job was to rule over cases from original jurisdiction to appellate. However the court took on a very important power early on in it’s life, this power was the power to declare laws unconstitutional or judicial review. This power allows the court to govern to a limited extent their word essentially becoming law. This may be seen as some as a bad thing, however in all reality it may be a necessity. The supreme court acts…

The True Extent of the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Influence Many Americans currently lack a basic fundamental understanding of the Supreme Court’s origins and workings. The Court is a virtually unacknowledged entity. Unlike the executive or legislative branches, most Americans are only exposed to the Court during a greatly publicized issue—such as affirmative action or doctor assisted suicide. The Supreme Court is entrusted with the Constitution’s preservation through the process of…

allowed congress to veto the attorney generals’ recommendation. The house of representatives exercised its veto and passed a resolution that Chadha should be deported. The resolution was not submitted to the senate or president and Chadha went against the veto. The immigration court along with the board of immigration appeal decided that the house of representatives lacked authority to decide Chadha’s constitutional challenge. That is when Chadha went up to the court of appeals and they decided…

constitutional interpretation, this has now become the use of the US Supreme Court. One main example of the use of a judicial review is found in the Brown vs Topeka Board of Education case of 1954, where Supreme Court justice Earl Warren declared the segregation of schools caused inequality and therefore unconstitutional. This highlights not only the power of the US Supreme Court but also that in the USA the constitution is sovereign. In contrast, the judiciary in the United Kingdom have no…

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. This means that they can declare federal laws unconstitutional, overrule themselves in previous decisions, and shape public policy. However, there is disagreement over this policy making power…

Although the Judicial branch is the last branch of government, it is by no means less important than the other two branches of government. This branch is composed of the Supreme Court and the lower federal court system and is in charge of interpreting the law. In the third article of the Constitution, all courts in the Judicial branch have the power to decipher the law, have a Chief Justice who is in charge of making the hard decisions over trials that deal with presidential impeachment, and…