How can a president pardon himself without admitting to a crime
I would argue that the Legislative branch has at least two important powers over the judicial branch: 1) the ability to approve or reject presidential nominations for judicial office; 2) the power of impeachment over federal judges and justices.
Arguably, the ultimate check on the power of the president is impeachment - if the president is thought to have committed a crime in the course of his duties, the House of Representatives can vote to impeach him, and then the Senate conducts the trial. A conviction requires a 2/3 majority vote of the Senate, and the highest punishment it can impose is removal from office. One could also argue that the voters are the ultimate check on the president's power - if they don't like his policies, they can vote him out in the next election. Furthermore, the Constitution (through the 22nd Amendment), limits the President to two terms in office, which prevents the President from becoming too powerful.
all three branches are powerful but the executive branch has the most power
Jean-Jacques Rousseau did not specifically argue that only a president should declare war, as his political philosophy focused more on the concept of the general will and the social contract. He believed that the power to declare war should ideally reflect the collective will of the people rather than being concentrated in the hands of a single leader. Rousseau emphasized the importance of civic participation and collective decision-making in matters of significant state action, including war. Thus, he would likely advocate for a more democratic process rather than exclusively presidential authority.
How can a president pardon himself without admitting to a crime
How can a president pardon himself without admitting to a crime
How can a president pardon himself without admitting to a crime
I would argue that the Legislative branch has at least two important powers over the judicial branch: 1) the ability to approve or reject presidential nominations for judicial office; 2) the power of impeachment over federal judges and justices.
The 12th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that a Vice Presidential candidate must be eligible for the Presidency. Some people argue that that clause is not applicable to term limits. The opportunity to settle the debate in court has never come up.
I would argue that the Legislative branch has at least two important powers over the judicial branch: 1) the ability to approve or reject presidential nominations for judicial office; 2) the power of impeachment over federal judges and justices.
Some critics argue that President Thomas Jefferson took a narrow view of presidential powers. He believed in a strict interpretation of the Constitution, which limited the scope of the federal government and sought to maintain states' rights. As a result, he was cautious about expanding the powers of the presidency and was hesitant to exercise authority beyond the specific powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution.
A surprise attack on the United States is the only justification for war by presidential action.
Coz if
Some argue that the electoral college provides an advantage to smaller states with fewer electoral votes, as it gives them proportionally more influence in the presidential election compared to their population size.
They wanted the President to be elected by the people of the United States. In a compromise (Remember, the Constitution is a bundle of compromises), they Founding Fathers decided to have an "Electoral College," a group of common civilians who's sole purpose for being elected is to go and elect the President. Of course, in this day and age, with technology making a popular vote of the President much more practical, many people advocate the abolishment of the Electoral College. They argue that the popular vote should elect the President, rather than the people who elect the President.
Because the real story has yet to emerge.