The authority to interpret the law is the court's power to scrutinize the meaning of laws based on legislative intent and the rights of the accused. Both attorneys argue why the law may apply to them and the judge chooses the argument he prefers.
False
whips
judges if laws and acts of the legislative and executive branches are constitutional
The simple definition is the Judicial Branch of the government is to interpret laws and decide if they follow the guidelines as it is laid out to the Constitution. The Legislative Branch makes the laws, the Executive Branch is to enforce the laws.
None. The Judicial Branch has no enforcement power. Their responsibility is to interpret and apply the law and ensure laws, executive orders and treaties are constitutional. The Executive Branch is responsible for enforcing the law.
A judge
The courts interpret a law when the meaning, application, or constitutionality of a law is part of a case before the court. Appellate courts are more likely to be called upon to interpret laws than trial courts.
Jurisdiction
Yes. A court's function is to interpret and apply the laws.
A JUDGE! Or in lesser cases: a Magistrate, or in even lesser cases, A Justice Of The Peace.
Courts interpret the law.
They interpret the law
If you mean the job then yes, they interpret our laws. By interpret, they decide whether the law is constitutional or not.
Yes. A court's function is to interpret and apply the laws.
The Pharisees
No, laws are enacted by a government/legislature. However if the laws are not worded clearly the judiciary can and do interpret them at trials and this becomes case law. Sometimes case law can appear significantly different to what was originally enacted.
Commander