0
What article deals with the judial branch of government in the constitution?
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
article 3 deals with the judicial branch of the government
Wiki User
∙ 15y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Which action is an example of judial review?
the supreme court declares that the minumum wage law is unconsituitional
What are the branches of the government and what do they do?
In most Western societies, the three branches of government are the:legislative, which creates law;judicial, which reviews law in application;executive, which executes law.
What federal government does the president head and what branch does this consist of?
Its judial branch and sorry if i spelled it wrong
What is the purpose of judial review?
It has the power to overturn laws that are uncontitutional.
When supreme court declares a law as unconstitutional we have an example of?
judial review
When the Supreme court declare a law as unconstitutional we have an example?
judial review
When the supreme court declares a law as unconstitutional we have an example of?
judial review
Which action is an example of judial review?
the supreme court declares that the minumum wage law is unconsituitional
What do the three branches of government do?
The People This assumes we are talking about America. It is different in other countries. The three branches of government (the Executive, Legislative and Judial) all have some form of 'say' when the constitution is being questioned or altered and they are all part of a system of checks and balances to make sure no branch becomes too powerful. The Legislative branch (the House and Senate) can propose amendments to the constitution which must be voted on and must be passed by both bodies. Most recently, amendments have been about pay for legislators, but some of the past big ones include women's right to vote, prohibition of alcohol and the return of alcohol, and limiting presidents to 2 terms in office. The Judiciary (ie. the Supreme Court) interpret cases and laws in terms of if they are in line with the Constitution or not (among other things). So a case where a woman is denied the right to vote would be in direct violation of the Constitution and restitution would be made to her. Judicial Activism is when the judges make a landmark decision about a more vague case that changes the way laws are viewed across the country. Brown v. The Board of Education and Roe v. Wade were cases which did not change the Constitution per se, but have left lasting marks on the American legal world by establishing a precedent against which later cases are compared. The Executive (ie. the President) selects the justices who serve in the Judiciary and can veto bills from the Legislative. He can also propose legislation, including an amendment to the Constitution. At the end of the day though, the first answer that the people ultimately have the final say in challenges or changes to the Constitution is still somewhat true, because the people elect their representatives to the legislate and executive branches who in turn select the justices for the Judicial branch. If the will of the people is ignored, that politician is unlikely to be re-elected, could be impeached and the people get to choose another representative, ultimately, giving them the people the last word.
What are the branches of the government and what do they do?
In most Western societies, the three branches of government are the:legislative, which creates law;judicial, which reviews law in application;executive, which executes law.
How do you handle a shoplift?
the person who catches you shoplifting prosecutes you, then the police take you to the police station and question you. The judial system will decide your punishment if you attempt to steal something very valuable or expensive, like say an i-touch. If you try and steal some lipgloss the punishment wouldn't be so serious.
Why did the Marbury v Madison trial take place?
In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress had assigned the US Supreme Court responsibility for petitions of writs of mandamus (a judial order compelling an official to take, or refrain from taking, an action under his or her scope of responsibility), which meant the Court had to hear the case under original jurisdiction (as a trial court). That gave them less latitude for denying Marbury's application, since, by law, the Supreme Court would have been the point of entry into the federal judiciary, and Marbury had a legitimate grievance. Agreeing to hear the case also gave the Court an opportunity to declare Section 13 of the Judiciary Act unconstitutional, because Congress had overreached its authority by assigning the Court original jurisdiction over something not specifically prescribed by the Constitution. This validated the Court's right of judicial review (the ability to analyze laws in terms of adherence to the Constitution, and nullify legislation that doesn't conform), thus strengthening the Judicial branch and making it more equal to the other two branches of government.
