Scientific lightings for the judiciary in the United States of America
Journal of college of Law for Legal and Political Sciences,
2014, Volume 3, Issue 10, Pages 181-205
AbstractEvery nation has its own judicial system, but what is important is how to guarantee thee4 existence of an independent judiciary by the provisions laid down in their Constitutions. Hence, the independence of the judiciary is an essential matter to warrant the implementation of the Constitution and its provisions in one hand, and to endorse the legitimacy of the government.In this context, the Constitution of the United States (the U.S. Constitution) has singled out its Article III to determine the legal basis for the judicial authority in appointing judges, their service obligations and the structure of the courts as well as the relationships between the Supreme Court and the lower courts. Moreover, the Constitution has divided the American political system into three institutions; they are legislative, executive and judiciary, without constructing any boundaries to circumvent occurring interferences between the three authorities. This intervention happens particularly by both the executive and legislative with the political affairs of the country, which is considered as a major dilemma of This research, thus, focusses on the independence of the judiciary, its tasks, approvals and the constitutionality of laws enacted. In fact, the U.S. Constitution did not put solutions for the conflicts occurring between the President and Congress in the political arena. This is to implicitly safeguard the existing balance between authorities, and to achieve objectives planned for. The researcher will conclude from this study on the judicial system of the United States the following three points:
1. In the past, the independence of the judiciary and the emergence of a strong judicial system had a significant impact on the course of the application of the Constitution. Besides that, it was backing of the authority of the Federal Constitution (Federal) and the constitutionality of laws and in general to respect the legal principles. In fact, before the year 1803there was a principle called “right of cancellation”, which means every state has the right to prove the invalidity of all legal texts contrary to the Constitution, and to accordingly bring the application of that legal text into an end. This principle is based on the idea of the validity of each State as a member of the Union and by their respective legislative could determine whether or not a violation of the Constitution had occurred. However, in 1803 the Supreme Court of the United States of America issued a judicial decision (by Chief Justice John James Marshall who and served as minister in the government of President John Adams), to reinforce the principle that in the event of a conflict between the Constitutional provision and the ordinary law of a particular case is presented to the judiciary, the Court has the power to implement one of the following three options: Firstly, to validate the contradiction between ordinary law and constitutional provision; secondly, to choose either one; or, thirdly to give preferences to the Constitution, and to disapprove ordinary law. Nonetheless, if the judge acted otherwise, his action was to be deemed in violation of the Constitution.
2. The United States laws are valid laws which in fact contributed to the success of both the judicial system and to the stability of democratic government in the country.
3. The distribution of major powers in the Constitution of the United States had been in accordance with the objectives set forth by articles 1,2 and3. This is to formulate the general framework which can guarantee the existence of the legal text between the authorities, and to ensure the continuation and suitability of the legal text for all conditions, but with no effect to the power of the Federal Union and its function in each authority particularly the judiciary and its independence.
- Article View: 137
- PDF Download: 26