Out of the three branches of government who has the most power?

Discussion in 'Political Opinions & Beliefs' started by Spooky, Mar 13, 2019.

  1. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    A federal judge has never been impeached in the history of the country for a bad decision.
    That doesn't mean the threat doesn't distantly linger in the background for them.
     
  2. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Some of that is just a myth.
     
  3. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In practice, the judicial practically legislates from the bench because they set precedents and they're the ones applying the law.

    This has both good and bad aspects.

    I don't think the Constitution foresaw that happening though.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  4. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The only real Constitutional powers guaranteed to the President are veto powers when Congress is passing new laws.
     
  5. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So you are saying, you were not asking the question. Why not? Now you say you know the answer.

    I have put ages of thought into this issue.

    Finally I sort it out like this.
    Executive can order the Army
    Executive can order the cops
    Executive has men under command

    Judicial has no army or cops
    Congress has no police force either to do this

    Sure in our hearts we want them all equal.

    But this is not in our hearts, it is in the law.
     
  6. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Leaders of the military forces swear an oath to uphold the laws and the Constitution.
    That means they are supposed to be ultimately bound to Congress, unless perhaps in extremely rare situations where the Constitution is blatently being violated, but even there they risk being prosecuted. Congress could always appoint new prosecutors and courts to go after them.
     
  7. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the executive has those powers, it is only because Congress handed those to them.

    The Constitution only gives some vague outlines on some of these roles.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  8. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I disagree. Congress should have the most power, and that's the way the system is, and the system that exists right now is the most optimal one (even though it is imperfect).

    Congress is furthermore divided into two houses, that of Representatives and the Senate. So there is some separation of powers.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  9. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Back to the beginning of all this mess, it was the then congress that created every power all groups use today. They were the father of all of it.

    Even the constitution took the congress of each state to ratify it. So we might hearken back to your state congress and blame them for all of it.
     
  10. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    In the beginning, we must not ignore the power of the state congress. They agreed in the first place to what we have.

    Congress of the then US was designed in the lower house to work for citizens. In the upper house, the Senate, to work on behalf of the states. Meddlers after 1900 ruined the Senate as the representative of states.

    I urge the argument though, do not dismiss the state congress in every state from this argument.

    To modify the constitution states get into this in a very important way.
     
  11. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That right there is the ultimate debate and what was the issue when the founders were creating the constitution.

    What they ultimately compromised on, is as you pointed out, a very unclear set of vague principles to follow.

    It's really the best they could do.

    And people think we have gridlock now lol.
     
  12. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He can only order them if they follow him.

    We see many cases of police for example ignoring orders like with the gun control laws.

    It's like the presidents ability to fire a nuke, it has to go through an awful lot of people, he doesn't just have a red button and it goes off.

    True that these people are probably on speed dial but still......
     
  13. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's Congresses job to follow the Constitution when they pass laws.

    They don't always do that.

    The courts can sometimes have some leeway to interpret laws in a more specific sense to avoid violating Constitutional issues when Congress likely did not consider those issues (unforeseen at the time the law was passed). But again, in a sense they are doing this on behalf of Congress, trying to implement what they believe the will of Congress would be if the particular case were in front of them.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  14. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They will very likely follow the law and chain of command, unless something is so terrible and blatantly violates the Constitution, and would likely result in an end to government run by Congress.

    In these type of situations we are talking about the rule of law breaking down, when it's not clear what they should do, and they could risk punishment if they do what they believe is the right thing.

    If it came down to a dispute between Congress and the President, and Congress was in unanimous agreement, they would almost certainly follow Congress, not the President. (Unless there was some divisive issue that could ignite a civil war and the President had been amassing power for himself, but I don't think that's what you're talking about)
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  15. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Congress doesn't actually write their own laws.

    They get a list together and send it out to a contractor who is staffed with constitutional experts and lawyers who actually write it to avoid the exact thing you are talking about.

    Usually they get it right, sometimes they overlook something.

    So I am really just adding into your post here, not contradicting it.

    On your second point I disagree.

    They aren't doing it on the intent of congress because the executive branch is also required to pass laws so that office's power must also be recognized.

    However it should be noted that most of the high cases are not due to a law congress passed, most involve the states.

    Individuals and corporations are the next block followed by the executive branch and congress brings up the fourth spot.

    So that would seem to validate your claim in a way.
     
  16. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's the same thing with judges a lot of the time, unfortunately.

    They're relying on other people for a lot of the little details. They're just there to take a look at it overall and put their stamp of approval on it.
    A lot of Congress members don't even entirely read through all the laws they vote on.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  17. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That was not my intent with my OP, I didn't mean to take it that far down the road.

    I was asking more procedurally who has the most power.

    Without going to guns.

    At that point it's an entirely different scenario.

    Here is an example.

    Congress passes a law, the president veto's it, they override it and he sues.

    The Court sides with the president but the congress declares the Supreme Court Justices incompetent and decides to impeach them to replace them with people that will vote for them.

    Could anyone stop congress or would it be eternal gridlock?
     
  18. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that's true in a sense, taking into account veto power.

    But I thought you stated we were discussing Congress acting unanimously as one body and not divided.
     
  19. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    By power, I am trying to visualize what it means.

    Power to destroy other nations? Well that is the president's power. Sure congress is supposed to declare war, but they handed a lot of that to the president in laws since around 1970.

    Congress can't force presidents, Say a Congress passes a law to declare war on England. All the president has to do is refuse them. He may say, England did no wrong.

    I see no way the court can force a president into war either. Can you?

    As i earlier testified here, if we want to dive into the ultimate early authority, we can blame our own states own congresses. They approved the entire operation of all branches of government.
     
  20. Spooky

    Spooky Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2013
    Messages:
    31,814
    Likes Received:
    13,377
    Trophy Points:
    113
    On a side note, if you haven't read this book you may enjoy it. It's by far the most detailed book on the inner workings of the Supreme Court, written by Woodward.

    He interviews tons of people with inside knowledge and explains exactly how their process works.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019
  21. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Procedurally (legally) it would definitely be Congress.
     
  22. Golem

    Golem Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    42,519
    Likes Received:
    18,646
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In a complete Constitutional Crisis, if both Chambers of Congress could agree, they would probably win out in the end.
     
    Spooky likes this.
  23. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If the Supreme court still tries to defy Congress after a resolution of disapproval from Congress, then it would come down to impeachment.

    If Congress really wanted to, they could have the last say.
     
  24. Robert

    Robert Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2014
    Messages:
    68,085
    Likes Received:
    17,134
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    By the way, it is not a huge news item to our Democrat ran media, but congress has impeached high court justices. Check into judge Walter Nixon for one example.
     
  25. kazenatsu

    kazenatsu Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 15, 2017
    Messages:
    34,638
    Likes Received:
    11,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes, that's what Spooky was discussing.

    Oftentimes they don't all agree, so the President and the courts end up having a lot of power.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2019

Share This Page