• 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)

    This can be seen in the example in Little Rock in Arkansas. After the decision in Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the Supreme Court declared all laws establishing segregated schools to be unconstitutional, and it called for the desegregation of all schools throughout the nation.

  2. Federalism essay

    The alliance of three states in 1291 to protect their independence under the Holy Roman Empire was known as the 'Everlasting League'. This led to the League of Thirteen Members and lasted for three centuries. In 1648 independence was granted by the Treaty of Westphalia.

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

    When all of the Electoral College votes go to the candidate who wins the popular vote in that state, then it becomes important that a candidate or their party to win states with the most Electoral College votes. This has become important in the current election as the result hangs on the outcome of a few thousand votes.

  2. Youngstown Co. vs. Sawyer.

    In the first part, Justice Jackson rejects Solicitor's argument that, according to the constitution, all the executive power should be held by the president. He uses the intent of the framers to discard this idea, stating that framers certainly did not want president to become a despot and therefore introduced checks and balances on president's power.

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

    This is evidence that the appointment process is further politicised, as the senate rejected an appointment solely on his judicial philosophy. This is also evidence that backs up the statement that the Supreme Court is no more than a bench of politicians, since a more than qualified judge was rejected because of his political philosophy.

  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