Judicial remedies

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 which is prominently demonstrated in the debate over judicial activism versus judicial restraint in court…

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…

Mandatory minimum sentencing in the United States needs to be reformed. Especially for the non violent offenses. For federal and state crimes there is a mandatory minimum sentencing law requiring Mandatory minimum sentencing laws requiring binding prison terms of a distinct length for people convicted. These sentencing laws are set in stone and prevent judges from fitting the punishment to the circumstances of the offense. Mandatory minimum sentences do not by any means override sentencing;…

their argument. The Supreme Court should have the power to overturn unconstitutional federal laws. Federalist No. 78, the Marbury v. Madison decision, Article III of the Constitution and the Judiciary Act of 1789 are prime examples to prove that the judicial branch has the authority to do so. 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…

“Ain’t I a Woman?” by Sojourner Truth used rhetorical strategies very effectively. Truth used rhetorical strategies effectively because her tone, text structure, figurative language, and the rhetorical devices she used let the audience know what she was feeling and why she was fighting for was she was fighting for. Truth used many rhetorical strategies in her speech but pathos, logos, ethos, allusion, juxtaposition, and pinpointing really made her argument valid and strong. Sojourner Truth’s…

of a constitution such as the separation of powers. In the UK the constitutional reform act certainly tried to implement a separation of powers. The Supreme Court in the UK took over the existing role of the Law Lords as well as some powers of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, and removed the functions of Speaker of the House of Lords and Head of the Judiciary of England and Wales from the office of Lord Chancellor which applied a greater separation of powers. However in the U.S they…

standards of decency calls for evolvement of laws, the idea of rewriting the American Constitution every 19 years elicit many concerns. First, rewriting the Constitution is unnecessary and impractical given our use of precedents and the power of judicial review. Not only so, there are dangers of rewriting the law so often because there are social risks and consequences…

Judges Leslie Tiller and Simon Skinner serve on the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, respectively. Each has an involved history with Minnesota’s governor, Joyce Cooper. In this paper, I will argue that the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause bars Skinner, but not Tiller, from hearing two cases to which Cooper is a party: the Sierra Club case and the Cooper Corruption case. I address each of the two cases in parts I and…

when everyone sees it differently. The issue of judicial restraint vs. judicial activism is that judicial activism* is generally refers to judges who allow their personal and political views to affect their interpretation of the law, and, consequently, their decisions in important cases. Judicial activists are often accused of ignoring stare decision when making their decisions. (American Psychological Assoc.) For Judicial restraint is a judicial interpretation that encourages judges to…

The second case was over religious businesses being forced to provide birth control to all employees. The Supreme Court voted down this specific mandate as it violated the freedom of religion. You may want to expand here? The third and most recent Obamacare case was in regards to the federal subsidies( money) being awarded to individuals from the federal government, even though the law specifically states that these subsidies should be, “Established by the State”. This case held an interesting…