08 Aug History Process by which US Judges Utilize Judicial Review Analysis
I’m working on a history discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.
In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued that the judiciary was the least dangerous branch of government. Many people would argue that Hamilton was incorrect and that today’s courts wield an enormous amount of power. However, Hamilton believed the courts were the least dangerous branch because they had the power of neither the purse nor the sword. The courts’ power increased with John Marshall’s establishment of judicial review.
In 1973 the precedent was set for abortion to be a legal right of women in Roe v Wade. Pennsylvania v Casey 1992 and Missouri v Webster further restricted that right to the first trimester. Now the Supreme Court is considering “reversing” Roe v Wade and restricting the time period to the first 15 weeks or possible completely ending the right of privacy where it applies to same sex marriage, birth control and sex outside of marriage.
Based on this information (and your own outside research and your own opinion), analyze the process by which U.S. judges utilize judicial review. Does this seem like a fair process? What extent does it have on the political lean of the Court, and therefore, on United States law (specifically civil rights and civil liberties)? Cite specific examples. Consider the concepts of judicial activism and judicial restraint in your response.
