The Constitution: Courts, Consequences, And The Future

The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and the Supreme Court is responsible for interpreting it and ensuring that other branches of government abide by it. If the Supreme Court fails to uphold the Constitution, it could result in a constitutional crisis. This could occur if the Court makes a ruling that is blatantly unconstitutional, such as interpreting the First Amendment out of existence. In such a scenario, the other branches of government could theoretically check the Court's power by impeaching the justices or adding more justices to outvote the current ones. However, if the other branches are unable or unwilling to act as a check, there may be no way to enforce the Constitution without defying the Court's ruling. This could lead to a breakdown of the system of checks and balances and a consolidation of power by whichever branch has the support of the military.

Explore related products

An Introduction to Constitutional Law: 100+ Supreme Court Cases Everyone Should Know

$26 $34.95

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Constitutional Law: [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$229.76 $359

Constitutional Law For Dummies

$18 $29.99

Constitutional Law: Principles and Polices (Aspen Treatise)

$97.32 $126.95

The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence

$1.99 $6.95

The president can veto legislation from Congress

The US Constitution establishes the relationship between the president, Congress, and the courts. The president can veto legislation from Congress, but this can be overridden by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress. This is known as a "regular" veto.

The veto power is defined in Article 1, Section 7 of the US Constitution. A president can prevent a bill from becoming law by declining to sign it, also known as a "pocket veto". If a president blocks legislation by pocket veto, Congress cannot override the veto. Instead, the legislature must reintroduce the bill and enact it again.

The Constitution also specifies that if the president does not veto or sign a bill within 10 days (excluding Sundays), it becomes law. This prevents the president from killing legislation through inaction. However, if Congress adjourns before the 10 days are up, the president cannot return the bill to the originating Chamber after adjournment, and the bill does not become law.

In the case of a regular veto, Congress can provide for an "appropriate officer" to receive the president's veto message and promptly consider an override vote. The president may still assert a pocket veto but must accompany it with a message setting forth their objections to ensure clarity.

The Supreme Court has considered cases concerning the return of vetoed legislation to Congress. In 1929, the Court held that the president could not return a bill to the Senate when Congress adjourned its first session fewer than 10 days after presenting the bill. The Court interpreted "adjournment" as referring to any occasion on which a house of Congress is not in session.

While the president can veto legislation from Congress, the checks and balances of the US government mean that Congress can impeach and remove a president. If the president defies the courts, it could result in a "constitutional crisis".

Congress can impeach the president

The United States Constitution grants the House of Representatives "sole Power of Impeachment" (Article I, Section 2) and assigns the Senate "sole responsibility to try impeachments" (Article I, Section 3). This means that Congress can impeach the President and other federal civil officers for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors." The definition of "high crimes and misdemeanors" has long been debated and is not specified in the Constitution.

The impeachment process serves as a check on the Executive and Judicial Branches, holding government officials accountable for violations of the law and abuses of power. It involves five steps: the House of Representatives charges an official, approves articles of impeachment, and sends them to the Senate; the Senate then sits as a High Court of Impeachment, considering evidence and hearing witnesses before voting to acquit or convict. A two-thirds majority is required to convict and remove an official from office, and they may also be disqualified from holding public office in the future.

The impeachment process has been employed against presidents, including Donald Trump, who was subject to impeachment for acts committed while in office, despite leaving office before the process concluded. Former President Richard Nixon resigned after Congress initiated impeachment proceedings against him in 1974, demonstrating the seriousness of the impeachment process.

While the Supreme Court cannot be directly impeached, Congress can indirectly counter their rulings by appointing new justices who can overrule previous decisions. This check on the Supreme Court's power is crucial to maintaining the balance between the branches of government.

The president can appoint judges

The president's ability to appoint judges is a key intersection between the executive branch and the judiciary. Supreme Court justices, court of appeals judges, and district court judges are nominated by the president and confirmed by the United States Senate, as outlined in the Constitution. This process of appointing judges is a significant power afforded to the president, which can have lasting implications for the interpretation and enforcement of laws.

The president's role in nominating judges has evolved over time. Initially, there were concerns about granting this power to the president, as it could be seen as concentrating too much authority in the executive branch. However, the delegates at the Constitutional Convention of 1787 ultimately agreed on a proposal by Nathaniel Gorham, adopting the method used in his home state of Massachusetts: appointment by the executive with the advice and consent of the smaller branch of the legislature.

Modern presidents have employed varying styles in selecting federal judges. Franklin D. Roosevelt, for instance, initially made patronage appointments to further his political goals but later shifted his focus to nominees who would help advance his policies. Reagan's staff played a significant role in screening candidates, and he added a personal touch by calling each potential nominee to offer them a judgeship. The names of potential nominees are often recommended by senators or members of the House who share the president's political affiliation.

The Senate Judiciary Committee typically conducts confirmation hearings for each nominee. While the Constitution does not set forth specific requirements for judges, it does state that these judicial officers are appointed for a life term. This lifetime appointment further underscores the importance of the president's role in nominating judges, as it can shape the composition of the judiciary for an extended period.

The president's power to appoint judges is a critical aspect of the checks and balances within the government. It allows the president to influence the judiciary, which, in turn, has the power to review and strike down acts of Congress that are deemed unconstitutional. This intricate balance between the branches of government is essential to maintaining a functioning democracy and upholding the Constitution.

Explore related products

Constitutional Law (University Casebook Series)

$296.95

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: National Power and Federalism

$59.81 $76.95

A Short & Happy Guide to Constitutional Law

$28 $28

Constitutional Law [Connected eBook with Study Center] (Aspen Casebook)

$100 $345

Examples & Explanations for Constitutional Law: Individual Rights

$76.95 $76.95

Constitutional Law: a QuickStudy Laminated Reference Guide

$8.32 $8.95

Congress can remove judges

The US Constitution gives Congress the power to make rules, regulate, set up, and dissolve courts. Article III of the Constitution governs the appointment, tenure, and payment of federal judges. These judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the US Senate. Article III states that judges “hold their office during good behaviour”, which means they have a lifetime appointment, except under very limited circumstances.

Article III judges can only be removed from office through impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate. This is the only method outlined in the Constitution, and it has been treated as the sole method of removal. However, there is nothing in the Constitution that explicitly states that impeachment is the only way to remove a judge. In theory, Congress could pass a law to remove a judge, especially in the case of courts other than the Supreme Court.

The impeachment process is a political one, and it can be used against a judge even if they have not exhibited "bad behaviour". The term “bad behaviour” has never been legally defined, and no judge has ever had their term end due to this reason. In practice, impeachment and removal of judges are rare and usually limited to serious ethical or criminal misconduct. If legislators were to impeach judges for political reasons, it would undermine the independence of the judicial branch.

In the case of a “constitutional crisis”, where the Supreme Court makes a blatantly unconstitutional ruling, Congress could theoretically impeach the justices and appoint new ones. However, this would be a drastic scenario, and it is difficult to predict exactly how it would play out.

Congress can halt Supreme Court justices' paychecks

The Constitution establishes the federal judiciary and vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court and inferior courts ordained and established by Congress. While the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, it permits Congress to decide how to organise it. For example, various Acts of Congress have altered the number of seats on the Supreme Court over the years, from a low of five to a high of ten. Today, there are nine justices on the Supreme Court: one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices.

The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in the constitutional system of government. As the highest court in the land, it is the court of last resort for those seeking justice. The Court has original jurisdiction over certain cases, such as suits between two or more states or cases involving ambassadors. It also has appellate jurisdiction over almost any other case involving constitutional or federal law. The Court's decisions have a profound impact on society, shaping the interpretation and application of the Constitution.

However, the Supreme Court does not have the power to enforce its rulings independently. If the Supreme Court makes a ruling that is blatantly unconstitutional, such as declaring a random case that elevates the justices to god-like status, it could lead to a "constitutional crisis". In such an extreme scenario, Congress could theoretically impeach the justices and appoint new ones. While Congress cannot directly cut the salaries of the Supreme Court justices, they can indirectly influence their compensation through appropriations acts or tax laws that apply to federal judges.

In conclusion, while Congress cannot halt Supreme Court justices' paychecks directly, they possess other tools to address unjust rulings or misconduct by the justices. The impeachment process and the power to shape the composition of the Court provide checks and balances on the judicial branch. Additionally, indirect compensation adjustments through legislative acts or tax laws offer additional avenues for Congress to exert influence.

Frequently asked questions