0
What if the president could fire justices of the supreme court of he didn't like a ruling they made?
This would essentially put the supreme court under the president and let him decide the constitutionality of laws if Congress agreed with him. However if
the opposition controlled Congress, the president might fire the whole court and Congress might refuse to confirm his new appointments and chaos would result.
What else can I help you with?
What if the president could fire justices of the supreme court if he didnt like ruling they made this could be a problem because?
Idk 😐
What if the President had the power to fire justices of the Supreme Court if he disagreed with a ruling they made?
If the President had the power to fire Supreme Court justices for disagreeing with their rulings, it could undermine the independence of the judiciary and threaten the system of checks and balances in the government. This could lead to a concentration of power in the executive branch and potentially erode the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
What if the president could fire justices of the supreme court if he didn't a ruling they made?
Ever hear the term "checks and balances"? One of the checks (limits) on the power of the President is that he cannot do what you describe. This means that once appointed the members of the Supreme Court can consider laws and cases without outside influence.
What if the president could fire justices of the supreme Court if he didn't like ruling they made?
If the president could fire Supreme Court justices based on their rulings, it would undermine the independence of the judiciary, a core principle of the U.S. system of checks and balances. This power could lead to political manipulation of the court, eroding public trust in the legal system and potentially resulting in biased rulings that favor the executive branch. Such a scenario could threaten the rule of law and the protection of individual rights, as justices would be incentivized to align their decisions with the president's preferences rather than upholding the Constitution.
What if the president could fire justices of the supreme court if he didnt like a ruling the made?
This would essentially put the supreme court under the president and let him decide the constitutionality of laws if Congress agreed with him. However if the opposition controlled Congress, the president might fire the whole court and Congress might refuse to confirm his new appointments and chaos would result.
What if president could fire justices of the supreme court if he didnt like a ruling they made?
This would essentially put the supreme court under the president and let him decide the constitutionality of laws if Congress agreed with him. However if the opposition controlled Congress, the president might fire the whole court and Congress might refuse to confirm his new appointments and chaos would result.
What did the Supreme court decide regarding military commissions in the 2006 ruling?
In 2006 the Supreme Court said the president could not unilaterally establish military commissions; while the president could request they be established, they needed an Act of Congress to be legitimized.
What checks do other branches of government have on the judicial branch have?
The Executive Branch could nominate judges in the Supreme Court, while the Legislative Branch had to appoint the judges, could kick them out of the Court, and could determine whether a law is unconstitutional.
What did the supreme court deciding regarding military commissions in a 2006 ruling?
In 2006 the Supreme Court said the president could not unilaterally establish military commissions; while the president could request they be established, they needed an Act of Congress to be legitimized.
How does the confirmation purpose affects which justices serve on the supreme court?
The president puts a name of a person for the court up for approval by congress. In the creation of the Supreme Court the justices were not suppose to be political, but maintain an objective stance so they could determine the constitutional value of a law passed by congress and hear cases that pertain to law.
Could the President or a state Governor veto the ruling of the Supreme Court as unconstitutional?
No. The rulings of the Supreme Court represent the final interpretation of a law. The only way to change the interpretation is to change the law, which is the job of the legislative branch.
What do you think of Supreme Court Justices having political party affiliations?
Supreme Court Justices do not necessarily have parties because they do not run for a political seat. The criteria for a supreme court justice has to be someone who is familiar with the law such as a former lawyer. If Supreme Court justices ran on a political platform that could complicate the position they hold because many political parties have money or a platform they run on.
