trasvina1

Daisy Trasvina

Professor John Vento

Pols 101

April 26, 20201

Marbury v. Madison:

The judicial review is considered such a controversial topic because there is either a win or a

lose. Now what exactly is the judicial review and what does it mean? The judicial review powers

the legislative, executive and administrative branches of the government followed by the

constitution. It is so important because the power it holds can lead to laws and local, state or

National government if being conflicted with the constitution. This also includes the checks and

balances. Checks and balances are what the government uses to limit the power towards each

other like the three branches of government. There has been many important case that include

that judicial review including Roe V. Wade I’m 1973. This case was the prohibition of abortion

that were unconstitutional. According to the fourteenth amendment it was a right to have privacy

when having an abortion. As the years went by the expansion of the judicial review grew and

was practiced in many court hearings.

Federalist 78

Talking about the judicial review federalist 78 discusses the type of peer it holds. Which I pretty

much explained in the first paragraph. So yes the federal courts have the last word whether or not

certain acts are constitutional. Alexander Hamilton views on the federal judges serving life are

pretty understandable. He explains how judges should have life terms as long as they maintain

good behavior. According to the federalist paper 78 he says it gives the judges a form of political

pressure that comes from the legislative or executive branch of maintaining that good behavior
 trasvina1

and to guard against those unconstitutional laws. The other part about the federalist paper is how

it describes why the judicial branch is considered the least dangerous branch. After digging deep

into the paper it was considered the least dangerous branch to Alexander Hamilton because those

decisions are not stable enough to actually be enforced. Yes the federal judges have great power

but it takes a process to enforce those decisions.

Should the U.S. Constitution be living or dead

The difference between a living constitution and a dead constitution is quite understandable. A

living constitution is the overriding original intention of the framers. An intention was the

creation of a framework that could grow and change overtime. So in other words since our

society will be changing overtime it would make sense to change our constitution and be able to

adapt to a new society. But according to originalism , I believe the constitution shouldn’t be

changed overtime because we should understand why they were written and should be keeped. It

is pretty self explanatory but we should also see what the framers actually meant. Words could

easily be twisted into multiple ways and I believe a living constitution should definitely be

something to invest in because society will continue to change and so will rules.

Why do the Nominees dodge the abortion question? I believe that the nominees dodge the

abortion questions because they don’t fully have an answer or simply don’t fully understand

how to answer it. Some of these judges quite frankly did answer the question like Ruth Bader

Ginsburg. She stated that her position is in favor of a women’s choice under equal protection.

Her answer was pretty much the clearest one compares to the other judges from my

understanding.
trasvina1