Chapter 12 THE FEDERAL COURTS: ACTIVISM

advertisement

Chapter 12

THE FEDERAL COURTS:

Activism versus Restraint

Theoretical Focus: Federalist #78

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Introduction

• In Federalist Papers # 78-83, Publius deals with three facets of the proposed Judicial Branch:

• The selection of federal judges.

• The tenure of office.

• The partition of the jurisdiction.

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Democracy and Judicial

Appointments

• Hamilton is careful not to address the lifetenure of federal judges along with the mode of appointment because it suggests that the judiciary may be seen as antirepublican. Why?

• Unelected judiciary

• The President (Executive) appoints members and is also indirectly elected.

• Senators are also indirectly elected.

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Justification for Judiciary as

Proposed

• Therefore, Hamilton discusses the nonaristocratic nature of the judiciary rather than its blatantly elitist composition.

• So, he discusses the nature of an independent judiciary and its authoritative purpose within a republic.

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Mode of Appointment

• Referring to Federalist #76-77, Alexander

Hamilton states that appointing federal judges should be considered the same as other appointed federal officials:

• Executive nomination

• Senate confirmation

• Hamilton proposes the same process for the judges who will comprise the federal judiciary

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Tenure: Life Terms

• The tenure of federal judges should hold their offices during “good behavior” etc. if not they can be impeached and tried for their “high crimes and misdemeanors.”

• Publius counters the Anti-Federalist concern that an un-elected, life-tenured national judiciary will not be tyrannical.

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Tenure: Life Terms

• Hamilton believes the duration of life terms ensures impartiality because the judiciary does not control the purse (money) or the sword

(military).

• The judiciary “is the least dangerous branch.”

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Judicial Review

• Publius never mentions “judicial review.”

• In fact, Hamilton refers to Federalist #22 by quelling fears that the judiciary will not be active in foreign policy issues.

• Moreover, he points to the lack of judicial power as a shortcoming of the Articles: “Crowns the defects of the [Articles of] Confederation.”

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Judicial Review

• Hamilton expounds the need for the Judiciary to declare acts of the Legislature “void when they conflict with the Constitution.”

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Judicial Review

• Thus, the rule of law is paramount, and the role of the national judiciary is to decide this, i.e. judicial review!

• Consequently, the judicial branch power is to determine what law is and it provides a check on the constitutionality of the other two branches.

• In turn, reason is the power of the judiciary branch according to Hamilton which allows for making judgments he calls “moral imperatives.”

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Judicial Review in Practice

• Table 12.1 Number of Federal Statutes held

Unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, 1790-

2008 Page 341

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Judicial Review in Practice

• Table 12.2 Number of State Laws and Local

Ordinances Held Unconstitutional by the Supreme

Court, 1790-2006 Page 342

© 2011 Taylor & Francis

Download