2006-06-13 14:28:22 · 8 answers · asked by Quest 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
The courts interpret law. They have no authority to hear matters that do not involve a current actual controversy between adverse parties. That's called "standing".
Congress can pass any laws it wants, prospectively and proactively, within Constitutional limits. The courts can only interpret law and interpret the Constitution, and can only do so within the bounds of a particular case. Congress can also impeach a judge for failing to follow the rules.
The Executive appoints judges and justices. Thus, the president determines who gets on the bench.
Those are the checks and balances. The executive appoints justices. Congress passes laws, which the courts can interpret. And Congress can impeach justices.
2006-06-13 14:29:56 · answer #1 · answered by coragryph 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
here is a little lesson in checks and balances...
the "court"--is the Supreme Court, also known as the Judicial Branch...the President (executive branch) has the power to appoint Supreme Court justices and Congress (legislative branch) has the power to veto the President's appointees. Remember, too, that Congress makes the laws, but it is the court's job to interpret those laws and decide if they are constitutional or not. The President can also veto a law, but with a 2/3 majority in the house and senate, the Congress can override a presidential veto.
2006-06-13 21:47:17 · answer #2 · answered by ms. teacher ft 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not much for sure but the presidents appoints his cronies to be Judges and the congress fights to keep them off as they know they are no good to start with but it's all an act. Congress just exchanges a few pork barrel projects for their approval. The whole thing is just a big rip off as some of the federal judges hear like two to three cases a year and claim they are over worked.
2006-06-13 21:35:33 · answer #3 · answered by Billy M 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Congress determines what cases courts have jurisdiction over and approves judicial nominations, while the president nominates judges.
2006-06-13 21:31:53 · answer #4 · answered by James 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The laws themselves. If a law is declared unconstitutional the congress has the right to change the constitution, it is not cut in stone.
2006-06-13 21:33:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I would think the "checks" are requests for legal clarity on parts of proposed bills of law, involving a process that keeps their attorneys and their paralegals busy.
2006-06-13 21:43:44 · answer #6 · answered by Mr. Wizard 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Those are tips dropped by the tennis pros who played in the DC Slam.
2006-06-13 21:40:14 · answer #7 · answered by mehale 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Checks and balances.
2006-06-13 21:31:27 · answer #8 · answered by whoselineguy 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋