Donate

This topic contains 11 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by  s.wilkes 5 months, 2 weeks ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #45317

    s.wilkes
    Keymaster

    Learning Objective: Explain the function of the judicial branch.

    Resources:
    1. Judicial Review & Jurisdiction
    2. Role of the Supreme Court

    Assignment:
    Answer the question:

      Do you think Alexander Hamilton’s prediction has come true about the Supreme Court? Why?
    #45902

    Natalie Parker
    Participant

    I don鈥檛 think I鈥檓 well-informed yet about the Supreme Court to know whether its powers have grown since its inception. Hamilton鈥檚 prediction is certainly true in that the Court does not ensure that the outcomes of the court are carried out, however, it is other courts that it truly depends on. It receives cases and sends cases back to lower courts, which ultimately oversee the end result.

    #45950

    Steve Spears
    Participant

    I am not quite sure how to answer this question because I am unclear on exactly what Hamilton meant by “dangerous” in this context. In general, I would say that the Supreme Court is less dangerous because they interpret laws as opposed to making them, however interpretation often largely determines the overall impact a law will have on society.

    #45953

    Viviana Gonz谩lez
    Participant

    It is probably the “least dangerous” branch (I think Hamilton was right) but it is becoming more influential in modern day society. Just yesterday, CNN published an article about an upcoming biography on Sup. Ct. Chief Justice Roberts and how the 2012 decision to uphold the ACA came about – it really could have gone either way and according the article, because of Roberts’ view on the importance of the health insurance market to the country, he wrote the opinion upholding the constitutionality of the law, which was unexpected.

    #45954

    Michelle Fernandez
    Participant

    This is a hard question to answer. Hamilton defended the supreme court based on the fact that he felt like they were the least dangerous branch because they didn’t have any control over money or war. As true as this is they are free from answering to the other 2 branches. They are set up to be separate themselves from the influence of the legislative and executive branches and concentrate solely on upholding the Constitution. So they can rule strictly on the laws of the land.
    For this to still hold true today we have to believe that these judges can rule on social issues, cultural issues or those with competing rights through the laws established. With these types of issues facing our country today, there is a lot of issues that can be left up to law interpretation by the judges. I do believe that today’s judges are influenced in these rulings by the party that appointed them.

    #45955

    Ashley Castello
    Participant

    It is hard to answer this question without really understanding what Hamilton meant by 鈥渓east dangerous.鈥 I tend to think of the Supreme Court as the most powerful branch of government because at the end of the day, they get the final word on whatever cases they choose to hear, and I don鈥檛 think that 鈥渓east dangerous鈥漚nd 鈥渕ost powerful鈥 are synonymous.

    #45965

    Ken Martin
    Participant

    “Least Dangerous”…. as to what? A rattle snake, cobra, or coral snake? One makes a lot of noise, another has a big head, and the last you don’t hear about often but is as deadly as all of them. Oh, by the way, they’re all snakes.

    They all have inherent power. While Hamilton might have been thinking like Michelle stated as to not having immediate access to taxation and war powers, they as Ashley mentioned, have the final say. With the way they are appointed, they can manipulate agendas which I do NOT feel was the intent of Article III of the Constitution.

    • This reply was modified 6 months, 3 weeks ago by  Ken Martin.
    • This reply was modified 6 months, 3 weeks ago by  Ken Martin.
    #46037

    Jen Loving
    Participant

    Hmm…I think Hamilton was right in saying it was the least dangerous due to having to rely on the other 2 branches of gov’t resulting in checks and balances.

    #46130

    Krista Davidson
    Participant

    I agree that this is a tough question to answer, probably because I don’t agree with Hamilton’s statement. His statement may have been more true 250 years ago but I think today, we are struggling with the judiciary branch. I agree that it is influential, politicized, partisan. Our judges are for life, this can be dangerous. Hamilton stated that the judiciary branches only power is “judgement” but that feels like a heavy word today. In our community we have been focusing on the ACA, and talking to our representatives about keeping this law protected, protecting our healthcare. I know the ACA is not perfect, but what if the Supreme Court decides that it is unconstitutional? I think this is unlikely but what if? Issues like this don’t make me feel like this branch is less dangerous.

    #46190

    Michael Wile
    Participant

    Hamilton’s prediction that the Judiciary would be the least dangerous branch of government has not come true. In my opinion, the Judiciary is second only to the Executive branch. The strongest branch of government is the Executive branch because it holds the most influential power of the three branches. The Judicial branch is the penultimate power because it determines whether the Constitution allows particular laws to be passed. If the Supreme Court decides that a law passed by Congress is not consistent with the Constitution, then the law is considered unconstitutional and is removed.

    #46244

    Larry West
    Participant

    I think in some ways the supreme court has become the most “dangerous” in that its decisions are final and for the most part absolute. There is no “veto” of a supreme court decision and if the supreme court finds a legislative action unconstitutional it can revoke it. Its power is absolute. Once its made a decision, the other branches must accept it. Are there any checks on the supreme court? I don’t believe so and that makes them the most dangerous

    #46304

    s.wilkes
    Keymaster

    I learned an interesting fact today: Did you know the Constitution doesn鈥檛 limit the number of justices that can serve on the Supreme Court? I suppose I always assumed it was outlined in the Constitution, but it鈥檚 not. Hmm. What do you guys think 鈥 is 9 justices too many, not enough or just right?

    https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/434620-supreme-courts-size-was-once-subject-of-division

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.


Sign up for E-mails, Dateline Magazine, and other ways to stay connected.