2302+Fall+Week+Eleven

Week Eleven Readings, Notes, and Assignment**
 * GOVT 2302


 * The Judiciary: Background**

As with the legislative and executive branches, we'll begin our coverage of the judiciary branch with historcial context. The Star Chamber was the name given to a court that was used by monarchs as a tool to control the country, and later under the Stuarts to suppress political dissent. These proceedings were marked by secrecy and the lack of juries. They became another symbol of monarchic abuse and their demise in favor of independent courts was another methid by which the executive branch was brought under control.


 * Readings:**

- British History: [|The Star Chamber] - Wikipedia: [|Star Chamber]. - Grievances in the [|Declaration of Independence] - Outline of issues presented in the Federalist Papers 78 - 83 (see below)

Assignments:

Internet Assignments. Write three answers of at least 100 words for each of these questions.

1. Detail exactly what was wrong with the star chamber and why its abuses justified arguments for an independent judiciary. 2. Outline and evaluate the grievances about abuses of judicial powers in the Declaration of Independence. 3. Select one of the Federalist Papers between 78 and 83 and detail what it says about judicial powers in the new Constitution, also outline the comporable Anti-Federalist paper.

Lecture Students

Be prepared for a multiple choice quiz on the various issue associated with the Star Chamber as well as the natureof the grievances.


 * The Grievances regarding judicial powers in the Declaration of Independence**

- He has obstructed the administration of justice, by refusing his assent to laws for establishing judiciary powers. - He has made judges dependent on his will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. - For protecting them [armed troops], by a mock trial, from punishment for any murders which they should commit on the inhabitants of these states. - For depriving us, in many cases, of the benefits of trial by jury. - For transporting us beyond seas, to be tried for pretended offenses.




 * Federalist and Anti Federalist Papers about the Judiciary**

[|Federalist 78] - [|Anti Federalist 78]: The manner of constituting it seems to embrace these several objects: 1st. The mode of appointing the judges. 2d. The tenure by which they are to hold their places. 3d. The partition of the judiciary authority between different courts, and their relations to each other.

[|Federalist 79] - [|Anti Federalist 79]: NEXT to permanency in office, nothing can contribute more to the independence of the judges than a fixed provision for their support. The remark made in relation to the President is equally applicable here. In the general course of human nature, A POWER OVER A MAN's SUBSISTENCE AMOUNTS TO A POWER OVER HIS WILL.

[|Federalist 80] - [|Anti Federalist 80]: To JUDGE with accuracy of the proper extent of the federal judicature, it will be necessary to consider, in the first place, what are its proper objects.

[|Federalist 81] - [|Anti Federalist 81]: LET US now return to the partition of the judiciary authority between different courts, and their relations to each other, "The judicial power of the United States is'' (by the plan of the convention) "to be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may, from time to time, ordain and establish.'

[|Federalist 82] - [|Anti Federalist 82]: The principal of these respect the situation of the State courts in regard to those causes which are to be submitted to federal jurisdiction. Is this to be exclusive, or are those courts to possess a concurrent jurisdiction? If the latter, in what relation will they stand to the national tribunals? These are inquiries which we meet with in the mouths of men of sense, and which are certainly entitled to attention.

[|Federalist 83] - [|Anti Federalist 83]: THE objection to the plan of the convention, which has met with most success in this State, and perhaps in several of the other States, is THAT RELATIVE TO THE WANT OF A CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION for the trial by jury in civil cases.