Mid-term exams
Student Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course Title
Professor’s Name
Date
Question 2
The Supreme Court in the U.S has nine justices, one chief justice, plus eight assistant justices. Circuit courts comprise three justices, while courts in federal district contain just one judge in each (Katz, 2017). The president appoints a nominee to a justice or judgeship post at the federal level. The candidate must be approved by a majority vote in the United States Senate–checks and balances, a role of the Senate’s “consent and advice” duty. All justices and judges in the national courts work for life terms.
Yes, I think in the USA, the Supreme Court is too powerful. It contains two substantial purposes, which are constitutional interpretation and legal interpretation. A key source of its supremacy is the fact that it is the last resort court for those seeking justice. It guards liberties and civil rights by striking down rules that encroach upon the Constitution. The Supreme Court was permitted to enjoy its control legally by the (1964) Civil Rights Act (Katz, 2017). Transformation is necessarily needed within the Supreme Court. Political power hinders the Supreme Courts’ nine judicial committees. Often a lot of authority is utilized by the state government and federal governments to repress opposition speech, property confiscation, and take legal action on those not forming judicial decisions.
The Supreme Court authority upset the Balance of Powers built into the Constitution because the judicial process is manipulated by the power of the request. Hence, to enable them to operate better, there is a need for change. To exclude any form of federal and political intrusion in the judicial process, a judicial audit ought to be conducted (Dietrich, 2019). Separately from the judicial check, fresh judicial actions ought to be taken after the ruling to decrease the Supreme Court’s undisputed power. I like better originalism to an existing constitution, and it urges that the original meaning of the Constitution’s remain fixed; in the meantime, fresh applications of that meaning might emerge with new technologies and new inventions – General public will require another principle to comprehend the text with no originalism, and natural law will not suffice. Pretty much everyone approves with the law of nature- It convinces rigidity. If judges have to interpret the legislation founded on the Living Constitution approach, depending on the case, then the Constitution may continually contain various understandings, which can ultimately form rigidity since any repercussion in the Constitution may not “read the Constitution.”
The government validity hangs on the governed consent, so what the populaces agreed to when they amended or adopted the Constitution is what should govern us. Originalism discourages judges from unlimited decision to insert their individual values into the interpretation of the constitution; it offers a modest legislation definition. The Constitution would signify what the individuals who composed it and whom it is anticipated to represent have always meant. The Constitution’s original public sense is significant not because obeying it hinders judicial discretion but because it is the law. The Constitutional scope is set lest constitutionally revised; consequently, though the new majority preference is left out, the court needs to obey the novel public meaning of the Constitution.
Question 3
The Electoral College is a procedure that comprises 538 general electors. The least Electoral votes required to choose a President is 270. In the House of Representatives Every State has a voter for every member comprising of two Senators. Electoral College procedure was formed by the founding fathers as a trade-off between the Congressional delegation vote and the President selection by the qualified citizens’ popular vote (Siderius, 2020). The Electoral College has been there for a long period now. It’s beginning to make persons wonder if we ought to choose our presidents via the Electoral College or the popular vote should have more weight than the Electoral vote? It is time to debate the advantages and disadvantages of the Electoral College to agree on if it’s for sure the finest choice for our nation.
There are several arguments against and for the Electoral College procedure, and it’s a period to go over the debate for the Electoral College, also known as the pros. A great reason for putting up with the Electoral College process could be to assist the public out by ensuring they do not make a bad decision in the presidential election and mess up the country. Secondly, the Electoral College forces presidential contenders into full swing national drives, whereas also making presidential contenders form national appeal by moving into closely challenged states and full campaigns in those locations. Third, the Electoral College is utilized to provide voting systems that are steady and may assist in averting recounts and avoid any voting debacles that the popular vote may bring about. Additionally, it averts the opportunity of any third-party possibilities from self-presentation on the electoral board from popular votes. Another reason is that it upholds the notion of American federalism. A diverse claim for why the Electoral College system is preferred is that it ensures that there is no ignorance of rural zones and that it is supportive in ensuring candidates don’t only campaigning in big urban areas most of the time. Finally, a claim for the Electoral College is that it offers a better appearance on elections to make most elections look like landslides giving the contender that victory is a much stronger obligation to pursue their objectives (Shkara, 2021).
Despite the arguments to retain the Electoral College, there are likewise a few supposed cons that go against the notion of it and favors popular vote more as a substitute. These will also be my two major reasons why I don’t support the Electoral College. Firstly, the Electoral College doesn’t essentially support the publics’ opinions for the reason that electors aren’t independent persons or state legislature agents but in its place are chosen for their conventions or party leaders’ loyalty. To back up this claim, it’s indicated that from 1992 to 2012 elections, more than 98 percent of voters kept promises to a presidential contender and that there were just two electors that weren’t picking based off of a party.
Moreover, there exist a few electors that weren’t affiliated with a party, but they’ve never influenced the election result enough to alter anything. Actually, since winner-take-all rules were put up in the 1820s, it’s stated that members of the electorate never perform on their own accord or contrary to the party of choice and in its place align their choices on contenders with their political parties. Another one that goes contrary to the utilization of the Electoral College could be the assertion that the Electoral College is useless in some ways and hence its major utilization is to improperly allocate political power and that it most yields negative repercussion. What’s more, the assertion states that it’s difficult to comprehend that a contender with less popular voters is all the same chosen because of the electoral voters since Americans are voting for the president and not the electors. I think Electoral College is an ancient and whacked system to utilize in the modern community, and I strongly think it ought to be eliminated and replaced with the popular vote.
References
.Siderius, J. (2020). Polarization and the US Electoral College. Available at SSRN 3564820. : https://ssrn.com/abstract=3564820 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3564820Dietrich, B. J., Enos, R. D., & Sen, M. (2019). Emotional arousal predicts voting on the US supreme court. Political Analysis, 27(2), 237-243.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2018.47Katz, D. M., Bommarito, M. J., & Blackman, J. (2017). A general approach for predicting the behavior of the Supreme Court of the United States. PloS one, 12(4), e0174698.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174698Shkara, N. D. (2021). The Impact of the Electoral College on the US Presidential Elections. International Journal of Contemporary Research and Review, 12(02), 21759-21769. doi:10.15520/ijcrr.v12i02.887
