• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

What are the differences between the Judiciary in the UK and the US?

Extracts from this document...


What are the differences between the Judiciary in the UK and the US? One of differences between the judiciaries is the branch of government responsible for interpreting and enforcing the law. In the United States the judiciary is known as the Supreme Court and in the UK it is known as the Judiciary. This essay attempts to highlight the differences in both of the judiciaries. One of the key differences in the judiciaries of the US and the UK is that the Supreme court is seen as more of a political body, with courts being described as either conservative or liberal. ...read more.


The nomination process tends to be rather political as many presidents tent to appoint their political allies to gain a political advantage, such as Nixon whom tried to change the direction of the SC to make them appear more conservative. In addition, many judges tend to be politicians prior to becoming judges. The senate also reject judges based on political grounds, such as Robert Bork who was seen as extremely conservative. By contrast, Judges are chosen based on merit by the Judicial Appointment Commission, based on merit. Many perceive the Supreme court as the more powerful as the two judiciaries through its checks and balances of the other two branches. ...read more.


However, it relies on the other two branches supporting and enforcing its decisions. For example, it took 20 years to enforce Brown vs. Board. By contrast, judicial review in the UK cannot undermine parliamentary sovereignty. If the judiciary decides the government has acted beyond its powers, a government can change the law accordingly allowing it to do the same thing in the future. In other words, although the judiciary in the UK makes the government more accountable for its actions, it doesn't infringe parliamentary supremacy. However, since the Since the Human Rights Act (1998) came into force judges have been unafraid to declare government policy incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, particularly in relation to terrorism. In 2004 the Law Lords ruled that indefinite detention without trial for terrorist suspects breached the Human Rights Act. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level United States section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level United States essays

  1. Peer reviewed

    Are supreme court justices politicians in disguise?

    4 star(s)

    These suits proceeded simultaneously in the state court system and in federal court. The cases largely concerned the matter and manner of counting and recounting votes in the pivotal state of Florida. There were charges of voter intimidation, ballot rigging and something had to be done.

  2. Federalism essay

    In 1798 the French occupation brought about a constitution moulded on the French. In 1803 a new Constitution was given to Switzerland by Napoleon called the 'Act of Mediation'. In 1815 the Congress of Vienna recognized the independence of the Swiss Confederation, and a new federal Constitution was adopted in 1848 which was replaced by the Constitution of 1874.

  1. Youngstown Co. vs. Sawyer.

    Another Solicitor General's claim about Truman's authority to seize steel mills was based on the text of constitution, which makes a president a Commander in Chief of Army and Navy. Since 1952 was the time of Korean War, the Solicitor General saw president having extended powers.

  2. Outline the differences between the electoral systems for the US Presidency, the US Senate ...

    These plans were rejected also on the grounds that firstly, the Presidency could not claim to be an independent executive if it was chosen by congress and secondly, if the legislators of the states were allowed to decide on the executive leadership then the President would owe them something which

  1. '9 politicians sitting on a bench.' Critically evaluate this description of the US Supreme ...

    was obviously well qualified for the position as a Supreme Court Justice. However, he was an advocate of the judicial philosophy originalism, which tries to discover the original meaning or intent of the constitution[4]. These highly conservative views were unacceptable to the Democrat controlled Senate, and so they rejected his appointment[5].

  2. Critically analyse the appointment and confirmation process for nominees in the US Supreme Court

    Democrat presidents, on the other hand, want to choose a justice who takes a looser, adaptive view of the Constitution?[3] . Reagan wanted to challenge the Senate Democrats by attempting to shift the court to the right. President Roosevelt too sought to manipulate the Supreme Court by appointing six Democrat

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work