|
Countermajoritarian Difficulty
The counter-majoritarian difficulty (sometimes ''counter-majoritarian dilemma'') is a perceived problem with judicial review of legislative (or popularly-created) laws. As the term suggests, some oppose or see a problem with the judicial branch's ability to invalidate, overrule, or countermand laws that reflect the will of the majority. The counter-majoritarian difficulty is often raised in discussions of United States constitutional law, particularly to discuss the powers of the three branches of the federal government of the United States. Origins Alexander Bickel, a law professor at Yale Law School, coined the term ''counter-majoritarian difficulty'' in his 1962 book, ''The Least Dangerous Branch''. He used the term to describe the argument that judicial review is illegitimate because it allows unelected judges to overrule the lawmaking of elected representatives and thus to undermine the will of the majority. The problem stems from the understanding that a democracy's legitimacy ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judicial Review
Judicial review is a process under which executive, legislative and administrative actions are subject to review by the judiciary. A court with authority for judicial review may invalidate laws, acts and governmental actions that are incompatible with a higher authority: an executive decision may be invalidated for being unlawful or a statute may be invalidated for violating the terms of a constitution. Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers: the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority. The doctrine varies between jurisdictions, so the procedure and scope of judicial review may differ between and within countries. General principles Judicial review can be understood in the context of two distinct—but parallel—legal systems, civil law and common law, and also by two distinct theories of democracy regarding the manner in which government should be organized w ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Article Three Of The United States Constitution
Article Three of the United States Constitution establishes the judicial branch of the U.S. federal government. Under Article Three, the judicial branch consists of the Supreme Court of the United States, as well as lower courts created by Congress. Article Three empowers the courts to handle cases or controversies arising under federal law, as well as other enumerated areas. Article Three also defines treason. Section 1 of Article Three vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court, as well as inferior courts established by Congress. Along with the Vesting Clauses of Article One and Article Two, Article Three's Vesting Clause establishes the separation of powers between the three branches of government. Section 1 authorizes the creation of inferior courts, but does not require it; the first inferior federal courts were established shortly after the ratification of the Constitution with the Judiciary Act of 1789. Section 1 also establishes that federal judge ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Judicial Activism
Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy holding that the courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of its decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint. The term usually implies that judges make rulings based on their own views rather than on precedent. The definition of judicial activism and the specific decisions that are activist are controversial political issues. The question of judicial activism is closely related to judicial interpretation, statutory interpretation, and separation of powers. Etymology Arthur Schlesinger Jr. introduced the term "judicial activism" in a January 1947 ''Fortune'' magazine article titled "The Supreme Court: 1947". The phrase has been controversial since its beginning. An article by Craig Green, "An Intellectual History of Judicial Activism," is critical of Schlesinger's use of the term; "Schlesinger's original introduction of judicial activism was doubly blurred: not ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.jpg "Click for more on -> Judicial Review")
(c).jpg "Click for more on -> Article Three Of The United States Constitution")