Imperialism in the Three Branches of US Government   Term Paper ID:27756 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: Argues that at various times each branch of the US government has been seen as imperialistic in regards to the other two -- even though they were designed to always be in balance.... More...

6 Pages / 1350 Words 3 sources, 1 Citations, MLA Format $24.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: Argues that at various times each branch of the US government has been seen as imperialistic in regards to the other two -- even though they were designed to always be in balance. Paper Introduction: The Framers of the Constitution created a document in which three branches of government were described. The branches were set in a perpetual balance so that each would have some oversight over the other two, and thus prevent any one from gaining complete ascendancy. However, this balance has not remained the same at all times, and at different times critics of the way government is operating have described an imperial presidency, an imperial congress, and an imperial judiciary. The implication of this being in each case that one branch of government has developed so as to gain an unwarranted ascendancy over the other two, and to make use of its power to impose undesirable policies on the American people. Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist Papers stated that the Supreme Court would be the least likely to become an imperial body given that it would be gi Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. The U.S. The aristocratic Federalists believed that an elitewas better suited to administer government and dispense justice, butjustice was always seen as a matter of balancing the inherent rights of theindividual as expressed by Locke and Rousseau, among others, and therequirements of society under the social contract. In either case, the process should startwith a determination of what the original intent was (even if that intentis now going to be violated), but this can be difficult because the Framersdid not always make their intentions sufficiently clear. However,this balance has not remained the same at all times, and at different timescritics of the way government is operating have described an imperialpresidency, an imperial congress, and an imperial judiciary. Four of the major functions of the law in modern society are asfollows: 1) Peacekeeping, the basic function of any legal system; 2) Checking government power and thus protecting personal freedom; 3) Promoting economic growth through free competition; and 4) Promoting social justice.Conflicts may develop between any two of these, and such conflicts can beseen between promoting economic growth through free competition andpromoting social justice, since free competition may at times produceinjustice. In terms of curbing presidential power, the congress has been moreactive in trying to set limits on presidential power or to take executivepowers into the legislative branch. A balance has to be struck and has been many times in the law, as when thelaw was turned to correcting past discrimination and providing the meansfor fuller participation even if this meant reducing free competition. The Constitution authorizes the President to make treaties,subject to a two-thirds ratification by the Senate. Works CitedBall, Terence and Richard Dagger, Ideals and Ideologies. The Framers of the Constitution created a document in which threebranches of government were described. Goldwater v. Those seeking original intent often turn not only to theConstitution itself but also documents such as The Federalist Papers,written to persuade delegates to the Constitutional Convention to aparticular point of view. Regan (1981), the Supreme Court upheld an executiveagreement between Jimmy Carter and Iran concerning the American hostagesand private claims against Iranian assets in the United States. Alexander Hamilton in The Federalist Papers stated that theSupreme Court would be the least likely to become an imperial body giventhat it would be given neither the power of the purse nor the power of themilitary -- powers controlled by Congress and the President respectively.Those who believe there is now an imperial judiciary see the Supreme Courtas taking action that interferes with rightful presidential power, whilesupporters of related Supreme Court decisions see the court as doing nomore than what it was intended to do --checking presidential excess. Carter (1979) was a casethat raised the issue as to whether the President could terminate a treatywithout the consent of Congress or the Senate, and a court of appeals enbanc decided in favor of President Carter, a decision apparently acceptedby the Supreme Court, which dismissed an appeal without decision on themerits. This position holds that judges should interpret theConstitution as intended by those who wrote and ratified it ("theFramers"), and this is seen as the basic premise of our political-legalsystem, that the function of judges is to apply, not to make, the law.Justice Brennan argued that the Constitution is a document that wasstructured for change and not to remain always the same. Agiven faction might gain control of one of the branches of government orone level of government. The overriding intent of the Framers was balance, to balance therights of different groups, to balance the powers of the different branchesof government, to balance the power of the states against the power of thefederal government. These are citizens who have beenexcluded from participation because they have been discriminated against inthe past, and because free competition was for white males and generallynot open to white females or any minority group members in the same degree. American Government. The Courtdid make this a narrow decision. This separation of powers is part of the system ofchecks and balances cited by Thomas Jefferson: But the great security against a gradual concentration of the several powers in the same department, consists in giving to those who administer each department the necessary constitutional means and personal motives to resist encroachments of the others. The branches were set in aperpetual balance so that each would have some oversight over the othertwo, and thus prevent any one from gaining complete ascendancy. New York: HarperCollins, 1991.Pole, J.R., The American Constitution For and Against. The framers of the Constitution feared the potential"mischiefs" of faction and designed a governmental system that wouldbalance competing interests and prevent the ascension of any one faction. Kaufman has indicated how difficult it is to find abalance between original intent and the need for ratification of theConstitution on different issues. In United States v. We have seen this with reference to the effects freecompetition has had on minority groups. Brennan (calling for a more activist role for thejudiciary). However, this would not enable that faction tocontrol the entire system or to create a tyranny over other factions -- theConstitution embodied a series of checks and balances to prevent onefaction from gaining ascendancy over others. (Stinebrickner, 1993, 19) The argument on both sides is noted by Stuart Taylor in assessing thepositions upheld respectively by Ed Meese (an adherent of original intent)and Justice William J. One such attempt was the BrickerAmendment in 1954 which would have made any international agreement otherthan a treaty possible only by an act of Congress; the amendment failed.The Supreme Court continued to accede to the President in terms of power.In Dames and Moore v. It is clear that the Framers intended for thereto be three branches of government and that these branches were to be inbalance, but what balance means is subject to interpretation. The net effect was another victory for presidential authority. New York: Hill and Wang, 1987.Stinebrickner, Bruce. Constitution was constructed as a series of compromisesbetween the two major factions involved in its writing, the Federalists andthe Anti-Federalists. One real problemwith Meese's view is that it assumes that original intent is a clear issueand that it can be determined objectively, which is often not the case. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation (1936)that the powers of external sovereignty were extraconstitutional in originand that these were inherent and plenary powers belonging to the Presidentas the sole organ of the federal government in the field of internationalrelations. Meese made the comment to the American Bar Association thatjudges should interpret the Constitution to mean what it was originallyintended to mean. In United States v.Belmont (1977) the Supreme Court ruled that the President could bypass theneed for senatorial concurrence by virtue of his inherent foreign affairspower. The power structure that the Framers developed was onethat was balanced, and this balance in itself indicated institutionalmethods for weighing differences and for finding a median course.Separation of powers was the provision placing different governmentalpowers in the three branches of government -- the executive, legislative,and judicial branches. In terms of issues arising between the branches of government,however, the Framers may have been silent on the issues, or at bestambiguous. Theimplication of this being in each case that one branch of government hasdeveloped so as to gain an unwarranted ascendancy over the other two, andto make use of its power to impose undesirable policies on the Americanpeople. Brennan calls hisinterpretation of the Constitution ratification of that document, and hefinds that every so often the concepts embodied in the Constitution need tobe ratified by each generation so that the document serves the needs of thetime. Guilford, Connecticut: Dushkin, 1993. In doing so, the court has not taken power to itself but hasgenerally legitimated the presidential prerogative. The Supreme Court has given the executive powers beyond those in theConstitution. It would seem that in general the Supreme Court has deferred to theexecutive branch on questions of whether power should reside with thePresident or with Congress on matters not enumerated in the Constitution.Members of Congress unhappy with such decisions may be among those claimingthat the Supreme Court has become an imperial body taking powers untoitself that it does not possess, but deciding between the other twobranches on constitutional questions is precisely the role of the judiciarybranch. The concept of justicethat drove the Framers made it necessary that both rights andresponsibilities be spelled out clearly in the documents and institutionsof society and that the means for deciding differences of viewpoint also beclearly delineated. Judge Irving R. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.

Many of our Papers can be Downloaded From This Site!

PLEASE READ THIS, IT IS IMPORTANT!

Office hours are Monday through Friday, from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). You may place orders for custom research over the phone during office hours. E-mail requests can be made to our graduate and undergraduate department any time, and will be reviewed during office hours. You may also contact customer service any time through e-mail, and we will review your message during business hours. A great many papers can be downloaded right from this site, but not all of them. If you would like to know if a particular paper is downloadable, just look in the description for: "Available for Internet Download: Y" or "Available for Internet Download: N" If you wish to purchase a paper which is NOT available for immediate download, you will need to make other shipping arrangements. Also, please be aware that these orders are processed Monday through Friday from 9 am to 5 pm (PST). If you place your order after 4:45pm on Friday, it will not be processed until the following Monday morning. We charge $8 per page for all of our pre-written reports, plus shipping (and tax for California residents). However, the highest cost of any ONE report is $136, or 17 pages. Please, take a moment. Make sure you have chosen the report you want or need BEFORE you complete your order. If you are not sure, allow us to help you. We do not offer refunds or exchanges, so it is important for you to let us answer your questions during office hours. Reports which are e-mailed or downloaded are in Microsoft Word format. We are making more reports available for e-mail delivery faster than we can update our listings. Please call to check on the status of particular reports. There are many other shipping options which are listed on the Checkout page.