POS 1041 american governement national week of 3/15 notes
POS 1041 american governement national week of 3/15 notes POS 1041
Popular in American Government: national
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Department
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Jessica Ralph on Saturday March 19, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to POS 1041 at Florida State University taught by Bob Jackson in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 421 views.
Reviews for POS 1041 american governement national week of 3/15 notes
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
Date Created: 03/19/16
****Came in late for class on Monday, 3/14/16*** 3/14/16 James David Barber theory that personality affects performance o Character; self-esteem o Political style o Worldview o 2 broad dimensions of personality Active or passive Based on day-to-day “energy level” Positive or negative Do they enjoy the job or not o Criticisms of Barbers theory is that it can be considered very subjective and there could be more dimensions o 4 personality types 1.) Active-positive: invest energy and enjoy job of president, high self-esteem, relates well, flexible with big goals FDR *Most desirable* 2.) Active-negative: intense effort but does not enjoy job; can become compulsive, presidency often seen as a struggle Nixon, Lyndon B Johnson *Most dangerous* o Inability to admit failure/weakness; may fixate on failing line of policy (Johnson with Vietnam, Nixon with Watergate) 3.) Passive-Positive: don’t work hard, enjoy job 4.) Passive-negative: don’t work hard, don’t enjoy job some would argue that George Washington’s presidency can be defined as passive-negative because he did not want to be president Dwight D Eisenhower 3/16/16 Supreme court Judicial review: power of supreme court to declare laws of congress and actions of the President un-constitutional o Supreme court may also rule on whether state laws are constitutional No where in the constitution is judicial review granted to the supreme court o Marbury v. Madison (1803): S.C. case where Chief Justice Marshall claimed the power of judicial review for the Supreme Court o BACKGROUND ON MARBURY V. MADISON Judiciary act of 1789 (law of congress) gave the Supreme Court power to issue writ of mandamus- a court order telling a government official to carry out a duty. Expanded “original jurisdiction” of the Supreme Court, outlined in Article III of the Constitution John Adams (leader of Federalist political party and second president - 1 political party) loses 1800 presidential election to Jefferson (democratic- republican), but with help of Federalist Congress, Adams tries to “pack the judiciary” with Federalists on his way out. ^^^ Federalist-filled congress allows this One of the last appointments he makes- appoints John Marshall from Secretary of State to Supreme Court Jefferson appoints James madison to secretary of state who tries to stop Adams and Marshall from continuing to give jobs to federalists Marbury was one of those federalists who was hoped to receive of a job—Marshall is now Supreme Court justice. o Marshall is very involved with this case and is put in an odd position Who should interpret the constitution? o Judicial supremacy: court should have the final say (dominant view in the U.S.) Separation of powers requires? Individual and minority rights need protection from the “majority” (Brown v. Board of Education) o Coordinate construction: meaning of constitution is/should be found in dialogue among the 3 branches Court makes mistakes Brown v. Board of Education was an overturn of Plessy v. Ferguson Too much power for un-democratic institution Un-elected elite can’t safeguard liberty and minority rights Court is institutionally weak and cant enforce its decisions- relies on President and executive branch How should the court interpret the constitution? o Strict constructionist view: justices should confine themselves to literal language of the Constitution and “original intent” of the Framers. Constitution should be stable and unchanging Difficulties with strict constructionism: Language/words aren’t self defining, such as “liberty” and “equality” o Words mean different things to different people If we want to strict to original intent, whose intent is it? James Madison? The delegates that were apart of the constitutional convention? The delegates who actually ratified the constitution? What about “modern” issues? o Wire taps, violence in media, abortion etc.- these things are not in the original intent o Judicial activist view (loose construction): justices should/must promote those principles and rights they believe underlie an evolving constitution Constitution is a “living document” and is changing overtime Court is a political, policy_making instituon—judges promote value and ideologies Court “makes” law and policy and does not simply “find and interpret” the law “activist” supreme court at work: Roe v. Wade (1973) o Supreme Court struck down Texas law that prohibited abortion (except in cases where mothers life is in harm). Majority opinion of Court written by Justice Blackmun. Extended “right to privacy: to include right to an abortion (with limits) He suggest the 14 amendment encompasses right to privacy with the equality and liberty clauses o Judicial activists are supporters of this case