NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
The United States democratic system includes certain features that are intended to protect against the abuse of the power by the government and public officials. Some protective features include: judicial review, impeachment process, freedom of expression, protection against unreasonable searches, equal protection under the law, and the rights of the accused. One important protective feature is judicial review. Judicial review is the power of the courts to review laws and determine whether or not they are unconstitutional. The Judiciary Act of 1789 stated that all citizens of the United States are separate but equal, referring to segregation.
Blacks were supposed to be treated equally and fairly, without discrimination just as whites were, but they were to have separate facilities, schools, etc. In the case of Marbury v. Madison, on John Quincy Adams last night in office, he appointed 82 new Federalist Justices. These "midnight judges" as they were called represented a threat to incoming President Thomas Jerreson, a Democrat-Republican. Jefferson feared Federalist interpretation of the law for the next 20 years, a fear that ended up coming to fruition. Among these midnight judges was one William Marbury.
Jefferson ordered his Secretary of State, John Madison, not to deliver the official documents granting Marbury his position. Because of the Judiciary Act of 1801, Marbury appealed directly to the Supreme Court asking for a "writ of mandamus" or an order to act. Chief Justice John Marshall recognized he would be correct in ordering Madison to deliver the papers but feared weakening the image of the Court if President Jefferson refused to comply. Instead Marshall ruled that the Judiciary Act of 1801, which Marbury had used to submit his claim directly to the Court wa s unconstitutional, and it was. In this way the Court was able to rule a law unconstitutional and therefore created the important precedent of judicial review, Another significant protective feature is the impeachment process. Congress may remove the President if the chief executive is found guilty of misusing his power.
In order for this to occur, the House must vote on the bill, and the Senate would conduct the trial. Andrew Johnson tried to interfere with the Reconstruction plans, and Congress passed the Tenure of Office Act. This measure barred the president from removing office holders, including cabinet members, without the consent of the Senate. Believing that the law was unconstitutional, Johnson dismissed Secretary of War, Edwin M. Stanton, an ally of the Radicals. Congressional leaders were fed up, and the House voted to impeach him, which meant that he was ordered to be tried before the Senate for high crimes and misdemeanors.
If found guilty, he would have be removed from office. Seven Republicans joined the Democrats in voting to adult Johnson. People believed that a conviction would damage the separation of powers. The attempt, however, was failed by one vote. This whole charade showed government officials and the public, that it really could happen. Another imperative protective feature is the rights of the accused.
Before the ruling of Schenck v. the Unites States, individuals were not aware of their rights when they were being taken under arrest. The did not know that anything that they said could be used against them in court, that they had the right to an attorney, etc. Charles Schenck was arrested for violating the Espionage Act, passed by Congress in 1914. The Espionage Act made it illegal to defame the government or do anything that might retard the war effort. Schenck, a member of the Socialist Party, opposed the war and printed and distributed pamphlets urging citizens to oppose the draft which he likened to slavery.
Schenck claimed his first amendment rights were violated. The court ruled against Schenck saying that the Espionage Act did not violate the first amendment and that in times of war the government may place reasonable limitations on freedom of speech. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes outlined the courts opinion by explaining that when a "clear and present danger" Throughout history, laws have been declared that were not constitutional, the constitution has been developing and changing since the day it was written to accommodate all kinds of situations, and I am sure it will continue on that way. Bibliography:
Free research essays on topics related to: judicial review, first amendment, espionage act, judiciary act, found guilty
Research essay sample on Espionage Act Judiciary Act
