The Powers of the US Congress - Essay Example

 US Congress and its judiciary have powers that are adored worldwide because of their roles and responsibilities. Unlike other institutions around the world, the Congress has played huge tasks of upholding the American Constitution and this is facilitated by federal funding. Accordingly, while both branches of the government are mandated to serve the citizens, they also serve the state in making critical legislative and judicial decisions. Additionally, the essence of having these two bodies is integral because they ensure that state functions occur smoothly without any hitches. As this paper will demonstrate, regulations of these institutions remain the prerogative of the Presidency and the executive (Cushman 109). On the other hand, in law, mens rea is vital because it explicitly exposes the criminal conduct of an individual. Consequently, this usually requires the burden of proof on the defendant’s side from the perspective of evidence adduced or the circumstances involved. Essay 1 The US Congress enjoys a lot of privileges and status because it is deemed as the strongest legislature. This makes it stronger than institutions found in other parts of the world because of several reasons worth noting. The powers of the Congress are explicit meaning they are clearly stated in Section 8. Therefore, this ensures that the Congress has additional powers that accord it the express authority of influencing both the budgetary and financial policy. The Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause is equally powerful giving the Congress implied powers that often missing in other legislatures around the world. Unlike other institutions, the Congress collects excises, imposts, duties and assists in the payment of debts. However, under enumerated powers, it has the control over the enforcement of minority rights such as that affecting African-Americans and Latinos (Dubber 89). Accordingly, these rights usually encompass equal protection, voting rights, and due process conducted all under the law. There is also the commercial clause involved by the Congress unlike other legislatures hence allowing it the regulation of commerce. Contrastingly, the checks and balances in terms of balancing power vested in the presidency, Supreme Court, Senate, and House of Representative is the prerogative of the Congress. As a result, this ensures that it dispenses the Bill of Rights for its citizens while keeping the above institutions accountable to law and the rule of governance. Under Article One, the Congress is split into two distinct chambers namely Senate and House who main role involve writing of legislations to aid in labor interests and corporate affairs. There are also committees that examine specialized subjects that encompass vital regional issues that directly or indirectly affect the Senate. Qualifications for these committees unlike those around those in the world require expertise and skills in the legal matters to understand the subject better.US Federal judiciary is an authoritative institution that forms part of other branches of the US government. Its authority surpasses that of other judiciaries around the world in terms of its jurisdictional powers whereby it can impeach or convict guilty persons (Gardner & Anderson 90). However, in a wider context, the judiciary enjoys the powers and privileges of imposing abstention doctrines, justiciability, habeas corpus and abrogation doctrine. Operating under a mandatory review, the US judiciary is tasked with listening to all appeals beginning from the lower courts. For example, Article I and IV tribunals oversee more than the 94 federal judicial courts including three territorial courts in matters pertaining to Alien Terrorist Removal and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance. Similarly, unlike other judicial institutions in the rest of the world, the federal judiciary under Article I possess adjudicative bodies that hear appeals of War Veterans or other members of the Armed Forces. There are also Tax Courts that investigate matters of bankruptcy especially the evasion of paying one’s taxes diligently. Interestingly, it judges are all appointees of the President with the express consent of the Senate. In other words, this occurs under the conditions of resignation, impeachment, retirement or death. It differs from judicial powers found in other countries where judges are above other oversight bodies. Establishment of tribunals is spelt out in Article IV and these tribunals assist in administrative of quasi-judicial powers and dispensation of judgments. Notably, in administration, the US judiciary engages in policy making to help in the revision on federal procedural rules (Cushman 110). Consequently, this has resulted to the Rules Enabling Act that creates platforms for education and research for judicial officers unlike most countries. Provision of Supreme Court Police is another role played by administrative powers to protect the welfare and life of federal officers tasked with handling cases. Essay 2 According to criminal law, mens rea is an integral element in determining some crimes. As a result, criminal liability test spelt under the common law affirms that a person is only culpable of a crime if the mental faculties were aware of the felony. Conversely, the traditional law defines mens rea as the commitment of the crime under certain conditions. These include the circumstances, conduct, and result and it is often summarized as CAR by the Model Penal Code. Mens rea asserts the knowledge or intention of an individual in perpetrating a crime and it is also called malice aforethought. Elements of a crime, on the other hand, entail the essential facts instrumental in convicting a defendant of a crime. Therefore, in order to secure any guilty judgment, the prosecution has burden of tabling evidence that wholly proves the suspect actually committed the felony. Likewise, for instance, the common law ignores the element of conduct because it does not encompass the level of intention that often includes recklessness, knowledge, purpose, or knowledge (Dubber 93). In other words, factual circumstances fully determine the conduct displayed by criminal, but it differs with the legislatively enacted crimes that operate under the strict liability offenses. However, conduct (Actus Reus) is a fundamental element in the proof of any criminal act because directly links the perpetrator to his crimes. In concurrence, both conduct and malice aforethought are supreme while causation involves the proof of actual harm to a victim such as homicide or aggravated killing. The burden of proof in a case encompasses the responsibility of presenting evidence in a trial that will tilt the expected conclusion to favor one’s side. Therefore, as a person who files a suit in a court of law, one is obligated to present proof of the charges while the other person possesses the benefit of assumption. This signifies that such an individual has no evidence to adduce for the support of his claim. Accordingly, the fulfillment of the burden of proof often compliments the benefit of assumption because it matches with the presumption of innocence (Harr 148). However, there is also evidential burden that supports the burden of proof whereby enough evidence must exist to present a case at court. In the US, for example, the defendant is, thus, expected to stipulate affirmative defenses as a means of proving some of the allegations. Under legal standards, other elements of proof could entail reasonable suspicion or reasonable to believe. Interestingly, the burden of proof differs fundamentally from a civil case in many ways such as the criminal angle. For illustration, while the burden of proof has the onus of proving the criminality of a situation, a civil case is usually non-criminal. This implies that civil law is mainly concerned with quasi-contracts or civil wrongs that do not require the invocation of evidential burden found in the burden of proof. Another major difference between the two is subdivision of law with civil law having substantive and procedural law while the burden of proof having rebuttal and preponderance of the evidence (Popkin 133). Contrastingly, while the burden of proof is attached to criminal proceedings where the intent is to impose punishment; civil proceedings only compensates for injuries in case of conviction. While the burden of proof is handled at the criminal court, civil cases are usually tackled in civil court. Likewise, the balance of probabilities is a critical component in civil cases especially when the plaintiff is required to prove his entitlement to a claim. Overall, while civil contempt forms part of the framework civil cases, in the burden of proof, legal responsibility is the central issue. It, therefore, is crucial for oversight bodies to remain vigilant in regulating the laws and acts passed by the US Congress because violation of the Constitution could set off a crisis. The judiciary, on the other hand, has the central mandate of maintaining law and order and should streamline its other branches in manage proceedings. In proceedings, there are criminal and civil proceedings where mens rea is a determining factor in establishing the malice aforethought and knowledge of a suspect. Similarly, while factors of concurrence, causation, and circumstances are essential in linking the felon to a crime, the burden of proof is infallible because it requires sufficient evident in proving a case in court (Harr 145). Therefore, judicial officers should remain conversant with the small details that define law particularly in the acquittal of innocent people caught in the confusions of the system. In other words, this transforms a country’s prospects in the form of good governance. Works Cited Cushman, Charles. An Introduction to the U.S. Congress. New York, NY: M.E. Sharpe. 2006. Print. Dubber, Mark. Criminal Law: Model Penal Code. Mason, OH: Foundation Press. 2002. Print. Gardner, Thomas & Anderson, Terry. Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases. Mason, OH: Cenegage Learning. 2012. Print. Harr, Jonathan. A Civil Action. Mason, OH: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. 2011. Print. Popkin, William. Evolution of the Judicial Opinion: Institutional and Individual Styles. New York, NY: NYU Press. 2007. Print. Read More