In the Constitution, the Supreme Court's specificity finds its origin in the adaptation of the British Common Law's legacy to the American federalism. And, the law's superiority or the 'Rule of Law' implies a strong Judicial System. Indeed, the United States seems to consider the Law as a mean to preserve the values defended through their Revolution and the War of Independence from 1775 to 1776. It will lead to the supremacy of a 'written' Constitution, and to a strong empowered Judicial Power through the Supreme Court's competences. This will then reinforce the Constitution's supremacy over the legislative system. The Judicial Power is 'vested in one Supreme Court', as Article III of the Constitution of September 17th 1787 states. The Article defines the role and the powers of the Court, and also gives details of the way federal judges must hold their offices. Nevertheless, these powers and competences remain very symbolic and not 'constitutional'.
[...] The case seems to put an end to a real process of institutionalizing the Judicial Power as the third branch of power. It is therefore interesting to note that the supremacy of the Constitution over the legislative system makes the Supreme Court to be entitled of a “judicial review power”, which puts the Judicial Power on an equal foot with the two other branches of power. To what extent the Constitution's supremacy over the legislative and judicial system justifies the Supreme Court's powers and competences, and makes the Judicial Power a real third and co-equal branch of power? [...]
[...] According to him, the Judicial Power is not the most “dangerous” one of the three branch of power. The judges only have the Constitutional Power in hands, rather than the Congress, for instance, has got the “budget”. It is to say that the Supreme Court is “supreme” and does not really deals with pragmatic and powerful matters. [...]
[...] Moreover, the judicial power and the competence of the Court extend to cases in law and equality arising under the Constitution”. This power also extends to state laws and to treaties. The Supreme Court has got a power to hear about all cases concerning the Constitution itself, the laws of the state and the treaties. This judicial competence is wide and large and covers all great economic, social and political questions. Indeed, the Court has got an “original jurisdiction” concerning ambassadors, consuls and maritime jurisdiction. [...]
[...] He also stresses that the Constitution is the “supreme law”. B. The place granted to the Constitution in the legislative hierarchy The Constitution is the “supreme of the State, as Article VI of the Constitution provides. The real and symbolic power of the Supreme Court comes from the importance of the Constitution. And in return, the Court contributes in reinforcing the Constitution of the United States. The Supreme Court has to deal with the contestation of the Constitution or of one of its Amendments. [...]
[...] Judicial Power: A third and co-equal branch, judicial review and independence Commentary In the Constitution, the Supreme Court's specificity finds its origin in the adaptation of the British Common Law's legacy to the American federalism. And, the law's superiority or the “Rule of implies a real strongly empowered Judicial System. Indeed, the United States seems to consider the Law as a mean to preserve the values defended through their Revolution and the War of Independence from 1775 to 1776. It will lead to the supremacy of a “written” Constitution, and to a strong empowered Judicial Power through the Supreme Court's competences. [...]
Bibliographie, normes APA
Citez le doc consultéLecture en ligne
et sans publicité !Contenu vérifié
par notre comité de lecture
