Judicial remedies

Commerce law assessment task 3- Lachlan O’Malley Mandatory Sentencing in New South Wales 1. Mandatory Sentencing- a mandatory sentence is a court decision where legal discretion is limited by law. Most frequently, people convicted of certain crimes such as armed robbery or murder must be punished with at least a minimum number of years set in prison. 2. The introduction of the mandatory sentencing in NSW was the outcome of several brutal crimes. The act is projected to measure alcohol and…

laws are set by Congress and do not allow judges to impose a sentence lower than what has been established. These sentences served the purpose of diminishing unlimited judge discretion and consequently lead to the limitation and even elimination of judicial discretion in sentencing. For example, an individual caught with or selling 50 grams of crack cocaine will automatically receive a 10-year federal mandatory sentence, regardless if they had no prior convictions or if…

Judicial review is the process under which executive and legislative actions are subject to review by the power of the courts. The courts decide if the law is in compliance with the constitution. The significance of Marbury vs. Madison was the supreme court declared that a law passed by congress was unconstitutional and therefore ruled the law could not be enforced. This case made the supreme court an important player in our history. Some notable examples of judicial review in the supreme court…

well and this is due to judicial activism. Judicial activism is when courts do not confine themselves to the interpretations of current laws, but instead they create law based on personal or political considerations.The term judicial activism is defined in The Supreme Court by Lawrence Baum as “…A court makes significant changes in public policy, especially in policies that the other branches have established. The most prominent form of activism involves the use of judicial review, the power to…

What we call judicial review today came about in the case Marbury v. Madison (1803), when Supreme Court Chief Justice John Marshall assumed that power from the legislator. Marbury v Madison made it clear that the Supreme Court had claimed Judicial Supremacy in deciding unconstitutionality. In the book, Taking Away the Constitution From the Courts, author Mark Tushnet argues, “Doing away with judicial review would have one clear effect: It would return all constitutional decision-making to the…

Judicial Activism Judicial activism is the idea that the view that the Supreme Court justices can and should creatively (re)interpret the texts of the Constitution and the laws in order to serve the judges ' own considered estimates of the vital needs of contemporary society when the elected "political" branches of the Federal government. Judges should not hesitate to go beyond their traditional role as interpreters of the Constitution and laws given to them by others in order to assume a role…

Kingdom. The government of Tony Blair adopted the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 which stated that there should be an institutional separation of the judicial and legislative work of the House of Lords. Article 6 of the Human Rights Act required a ‘’stricter view taken of anything which might undermine the independence or impartiality of a judicial tribunal.’’ In the case of A v SSHD, Lord Bingham underlined the principle of the separation of powers ‘’great weight should be given to the…

1. Define judicial review. Briefly explain who holds this power and how this power was established. What was Chief Justice Marshall’s argument in favor of this doctrine? - Judicial review is the power that the judiciary has to review laws passed by the states, or government regulations that could possibly conflict with the US Constitution. The Supreme Court has the original, and final right, to determine if any states’ law conflict with the Constitution. The Supreme Court also has the right to…

many judges from the Suharto era retaining their positions, and party fragmentation has stymied efforts to combat judiciary corruption. If corruption of the judiciary is so widespread as to render irrelevant the use of formal politics to roll back judicial independence, why bother with a political or constitutional crisis when you can just buy a judge when you need a decision? More research may be needed in this area to determine in what ways a corrupt judiciary counteracts the rule of law or…

the authority of government derives from and is limited by a body of fundamental law. There are five main principles that constitutionalism is derived from, those principles are: Separation of Powers/ Checks and Balances, Federalism, Stare Decisis, Judicial Philosophy and finally the Protection for individual rights. Each of these aspects play a key role when dealing with constitutionalism. Throughout the book Toobin shares various perspectives from Supreme Court justices and their beliefs and…