The U.S. Court System and Social Change: Judicial Independence and Constitutional Constraints
Overview
This paper examines the role of the U.S. court system in producing social change through two contrasting perspectives. It analyzes Hamilton's argument for judicial independence as a safeguard against unjust laws, and contrasts this with the constrained court view that argues structural limitations prevent courts from achieving significant social reform.
What this coursework covers
- Hamilton's Theory of Judicial Independence: Courts as checks against unjust legislation and political influence
- The Constrained Court View: Structural limitations and decentralized judicial system preventing meaningful social change
- Analysis of competing perspectives on judicial capacity for social reform
Preview
Student
Instructor
Course
Date
The U.S. Court System and Social Change
Question 1
Hamilton argued that there was no act of legislation that was contradicting the views of the constitutions would be valid. The courts are bound by strict rules and precedents that serve in defining and pointing out in the particular cases that arise before them. In this regard, the independence of the judges was a safeguard against the effects of frequents ills in the society. The mitigation of severe and atrial laws established is usually checked through the confines of the judiciary. The judges are able to establish whether a certain law is just or not. Therefore, the impacts of Hamilton’s rationale is that the judiciary has impact on the character of the governments and scrupling all unjust laws or policies established. Since the courts are above political affiliation, they prevent judges from cutting deals and ensuring that they can easily achieve their results (Rosenberg 13).
Question 2
The constrained court view establishes that due to the prevailing constraints that are imposed on the United States courts by the constitution as well as the congress, it is impossible for the court to achieve significant change. With a decentralized nature of the judicial system, courts may be constrained from producing diverse social reform for several reasons. With the such a court structure, there are possibilities for bias during public policy formulation as well as misinterpretation that influences court decisions in lower levels.