I agree with Hamilton on this issue, which was granted independence by living in the judicial system is important for the fare and the people. The rights and privileges that have been enumerated in the Constitution must be balanced and maintenance of a single way of life for citizens of the United States. For example, if the judiciary has served a term of four years as President, the judicial system would be a part of the law. Specifically, the judges have chosen to represent the type of government that is running. Each president will be able to choose the nine Supreme Court justices, reflecting their personal views(Konefsky, pp 78-345). In particular, it would be unfair to the citizens of the United States is not granted a fair trial because the judges would face. It is certainly not adequate protection, if the government is in conflict with their happiness, we can abolish their government. In addition, stability requires that these changes are orderly and constitutional. The only way citizens can feel that their rights are guaranteed is that the judicial system protects against certain people, both inside and outside government, who do not agree with your interest or happiness. Finally, the United States form of government must be many laws are very complex and contradictory. Discover all these laws for many years, and Hamilton found in the short term to discourage the best candidates to approach this type of position (Konefsky, pp 78-345).
Hamilton emphasized that the judiciary was by far the weakest of the legislative branch, executive and judicial. He used the analogy of a "sword" to describe the power of the executive, who is commander in chief of the armed forces of the country. He then described the law as the "bag" as it has approved the package of fiscal measures and government spending (Miller, pp 67-489). He used these analogies to illustrate the lack of power and influence that the judiciary was more than the other two branches. He had, according to Hamilton, "neither the strength nor the decision, but simply because it depends on the Judicial Executive for the effectiveness of their sentence. Certainly, Hamilton knew that something needed to be done in order to maintain stability in the three branches for the benefit of society. To protect the rights of people, Hamilton said the importance of judicial review in the future of society. The judiciary must have the power of judicial review to declare null and void laws that the court is deemed unconstitutional (McCloskey, pp 34-189).
Meanwhile, Hamilton, the idea was new and shocking to many of his detractors, Hamilton used the Federalist Papers to speak against the anti-federalists. Of course, the anti-Federalists did not agree with your idea, noting that judicial review gave too much power to the judiciary of their situation and pushed the Legislature. Hamilton responded by arguing that both are lower than the power of the people and that the judiciary's role is to ensure that Parliament remains a "server" of the Constitution and the people who created it, not a "master." Based on the principle that "the Constitution is, in reality, and must be considered by the court as a fundamental law," Hamilton concerning a judicial guarantee of the Constitution, which could also promote free government(Bowers, pp 231-190). Planning, Hamilton believes that the judicial system as a barrier to the encroachments and oppressions of the representative body and the defense of public justice. Defending the protection of an individual's life, liberty and property, said that judicial review by a control in the Legislature of the invasion of human rights. Conquest of Hamilton, which does not identify a legal system as a threat to the government (Orth, pp 67-267).
I therefore also said that when the judge integrity unites with knowledge, power is in good hands. This statement reaffirms the safety of a powerful judiciary in the government. Although judicial review is not clearly mentioned in the Constitution, the Supreme Court of the United States has established the legality of the concept when he canceled an Act of Congress in the 1803 case Marbury v. Madison (Bowers, pp 231-190). The courts have accepted a judicial review of the twentieth century. At the same time, critics argue that the courts are too powerful in their decisions. It is still a big question whether the courts exhibit "judicial activism" for striking the law. However, Hamilton has been accurate in predicting that the United States Supreme Court and lower courts protect the rights defined by people in their Constitution
Finally, the Federalist paper number 81 is the third most cited in the wide range of documents from the federal government as an important extension of the arguments of Hamilton in his previous accounts. Alexander Hamilton described in this account of what he thought of the role of the Supreme Court should be. The first point that has been developed in the fact that there should always be a constitutional method of giving value to constitutional provisions(Konefsky, pp 78-345). Ultimately, it is a separate and independent, is more than the legislature. Hamilton reviews the request that the Supreme Court will become the supreme power, since it has the power to interpret laws in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution. Basically, it is about how the powers of the judiciary should be distributed. I agree with the ideas of Hamilton in the 81st article; His ideas about the judicial system are well planned and not try to abuse the power they possess. Places that controls the balance of the judiciary in all aspects of his ideas, insisting that each scene was examined and the argument would be thrown their way. Federalist on paper, not only express their opinion, but also to justify all the arguments that lawyers have all expressed in the Anti-Federalist Papers, which gives me the best argument of Hamilton(Miller, pp 67-489).
Conclusion
As mentioned above, the ideas of Hamilton, in detail, stressing the importance of an independent judiciary. Hamilton through views and ideas using the Federalist Papers to minimize the importance of the fight against the Federalist view that the Supreme Court would be too strong a structure as first suggested Hamilton. It does so through a system of mandate for the life of the Supreme Court, foreshadowing the importance of judicial review, and the need to express certain powers that the executive and legislative bodies at their disposal. In addition, attempts to mitigate the opposition fears that the power of the judiciary would be too excessive abuse and, if granted. In total, the Federalist Papers Hamilton showed that compiles some of the wise and moral principles which I have already discussed in class. With the discussion of the judiciary, it is also clear to order, justice and freedom May be linked to the Hamilton attempted to ratify the constitution. Although we have talked about the English Bill of Rights of this document Revolutionary May be linked to the Federalist Papers. When reviewing these documents, it is clear that both had a goal of the reform of future generations. I think Hamilton's Federalist Paper very enjoyable, especially when looking in the type of judicial system and the balance of power within the government that exist in society today. Once again, through the Federalist Papers, Hamilton attempted to reassure Americans that the federal courts do not enjoy the powers conferred. Hamilton tried to do in the Federalist Papers of the decline of the Anti-Federalists concerns of a very powerful Supreme Court.
Work Cited
Bowers, Claude G, Jefferson and Hamilton: Houghton Mifflin publications, 1953, pp 231-190.
Konefsky, Samuel J: John Marshall and Alexander Hamilton - Architects of the American Constitution: Macmillan Co., 1964, pp 78-345.
McCloskey, Robert G. The American Supreme Court, Second Edition, Revised by Sanford Levinson, University of Chicago Press, 1994, pp 34-189.
Miller, Arthur S. toward Increased Judicial Activism: The Political Role of the Supreme Court, Greenwood Press, 1982, pp 67-489.
Orth, John V: The Judicial Power of the United States - The Eleventh Amendment in American History, Oxford University Press, 1987, pp 67-267.
