The Judiciary is one of the three branches of the government. The other two are the Executive and the Legislative branches. Each has been granted power to serve the interests of the people and carry out the…
Download file to see previous pages...
Generally, this power of judicial review is meant for the Courts to oversee the legislative or executive functions. However, the Court is able to exercise the power to uphold or deny the congressional and executive actions in passing upon the issue of constitutionality. Thus, judicial review can, in effect, nullify the acts of the other branches of the government.
This should not be taken that the Supreme Court overpowers the other two branches. Instead, this authority must be understood in the light of the need to uphold the Constitution at all times. After all, in a country where rule of law is observed, the Constitution must be upheld without exception. To state otherwise will only result to the negation of the interests of the people.
The power of the Supreme Court to make pronouncements as regards existing laws is not an absolute power. It is a rule that the power to exercise judicial review must be exercised only when there is an actual case or an actual controversy. Thus, to properly request the courts to examine the constitutionality of law, there must be at least one party who stands to benefit or to be injured by the questioned provisions of the law and who shall ask a pronouncement from the Court. This can be properly illustrated in the case of Marbury v. Madison.
The case of Marbury v. Madison is considered a very important landmark case in the history of the Unite States Supreme Court. This is the first instance that the U.S. Supreme Court was able to declare and exercise its power of judicial review.
What happened in the case of Marbury v. Madison? It was in the year 1800. William Marbury had been nominated, appointed as a justice of peace and given a commission. John Adams, the president of the United States back then, already signed the commission. The United States seals had been affixed to it also.
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
As a result the societies have been faced with recurrent problems which seem not to be ending. The government should therefore work hand in hand with the law courts to ensure there are correct measures and laws that will uphold the integrity of Hong Kong’s society.
These Courts act as an alternative to compulsory treatment for imprisonment. Drug Courts offer court directed, inclusive interventions intended to manage drug use and criminal activity among offenders living in the community (Hennessy & Pallone, 2002). Drug Courts’ Judges dispense therapeutic justice – instead of solving problems by imposing harsh penalties, they try to solve them through treatment as well as counseling.
The methodology undertaken in this research is a qualitative research method incorporating a major investigation through the several research materials available on the topic. The most important hypothesis of this research paper is that the Drug Courts have a vital role as an effective tool in changing criminal behavior at large.
138). In 1994 alone drug trafficking and conviction accounted for 31.4% of felony convictions nationwide (12.5% for possession and 19% for trafficking). Further, between 1980 and 1989 arrest for drug offenses rose 134% (Armstrong 2003, p. 140). Frustrated with the inability to control the seemingly unstoppable drug trade and increased, repeated drug abuse, the Chief Justice of the 11th Judicial Circuit in mid 1989 set in motion a series of events that would revolutionize the methodology used by the courts to deal with the drug problem within the United States.
Drug courts emerged in response to astonishing growth of drug-related crime rates over the 1980s. Spread of crack cocaine multiplied the number of arrests and trials associated with drug and substance abuse. The first reaction of the authorities was to toughen criminal codes thus providing more strict penalties for drug-related crimes.
These recommendations take the place of ridding entirely of the juvenile court system and subjected criminal youths to the existing court system that deals with of-age offenders.
However, Feld dismisses these other options because he feels
Therefore, the role of U.S. District Court is to hear civil as well as criminal cases that come under the category of federal cases.
The U.S. Court of Appeals is responsible for hearing all the appeals that come from District Court of the region. The U.S.
Although the federal law is a complex set of statutes and court decisions, its basic principle is simply based on the concept of the rights of the expenditure of federal funds and collecting debts. (Office of General Counsel, 1994)
History of Federal Courts. United
book consequently comments on the wrong doings of the American legal system in relation the civic knowledge as per the system to the overall American society. Additionally, this book provides liberal and legal minds based comments on the public’s criticism and explains why a
The focus of the study is unified family courts and drug treatment courts (DTCs). It assessed the impact these courts had on how long children stayed in foster care and the placement they had when exiting from foster care. The study also assessed the impact time spent in foster care had on children’s performance in school.
7 Pages(1750 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Courts for FREE!