We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

Justification And Weaknesses Of Non-Interpretive Essay

Justification and Weaknesses of
the Non-Interpretive Model
Brief: Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model The
question of Constitutional interpretation still has yet to be resolved.
Should only the explicit commands of our nations Founding Fathers be
referenced in courts of law, or can it be justified that an outside body
should extrapolate from the specific text of the Constitution to define
and defend additional fundamental rights? Further, if this body, namely
the Supreme Court, bases its decisions of constitutional relevance not
wholly on exact interpretation, then regardless of reason, are they
wholly illegitimate? The non-interpretive model allows the Court to
interpret beyond the exact wording of the Constitution to define and
protect the values of a society. The question of how the
non-interpretative model can be justified must be answered. Despite
much remaining confusion between the two models, it is clear that
history has chosen the non-interpretative model without which many of
the defining points in our nations history would be unjustified. The
overwhelming strength of the non-interpretive model is that it has
allowed for many fundamental decisions that have served to protect
the natural rights of the members of this society.

We will write a custom essay on Justification And Weaknesses Of Non-Interpretive specifically for you
for only $16.38 $13.9/page

Order now

If on the other hand
the interpretive model is to be accepted, a significant number of
decisions must be revoked. Briefly, the majority of the due process
clause is no longer justified. Fair criminal and civil procedures must be
dismantled since they have no specific textual reference in the
Constitution. Freedom of speech, religion, and property rights are all
called in question. Also affected is the legitimacy of franchise and
legislative apportionment bodies of doctrine. The equal protection
clause of the Constitution when read literally outlines the defense of
some forms of racial discrimination.

However, it does not immediately
guarantee the right to vote, eligibility for office, or the right to serve
on a jury. Additionally, the clause does not suggest that equal-facility
segregation is not to be allowed. Finally, the freedom from cruel and
unusual punishments as outlined in the eighth amendment loses its
flexibility. In this manner, a prima facie argument against the
interpretive model is evident. Without the ability to move beyond the
specific wording, the Court loses its authority to protect what society
values as basic human rights. A fundamental question relevant to this
debate is whether or not values within our society are time-enduring
or changing.

When the Supreme Court makes a controversial
decision, does it use the text of the Constitution to legitimize principles
of natural law, social norms and arrangements? Or, is it acting as an
interpreter of slowly changing values and imposing its views on society
through its decisions? The Constitution is not a stagnant document; it
is very much alive and changing with the times. Critics argue that the
amendment process was created to allow change and that the role of
the Judiciary does not include the power to change stated commands
in addition to that of enforcing them. However, in many cases, the
amendment process is inadequate for clarification of issues of human
rights. A great virtue of the non-interpretive model is that the Court
has the power to strike down unconstitutional legislation that allows
for the Court to preserve the rights of the people. Non-interpretation
then requires the application of understood codes, yet the
decision-making process is far from mechanical. Critics contest that
the Court should not have the ability to interpret societal values in a
given period of time.

However, as has been shown, history has upheld
this tradition. A number of questions now arise. Is it practically wise to
place the responsibility to define and protect human rights in the
hands of Supreme Court Justices? The answer lies in ones
interpretation of history. While it is true that the Court has made
decisions that reflect its own biases and interests, it can be shown
that the Court has also consistently acted to secure the rights of
citizens and to limit federal and state powers. Following, is the
definition and enforcement of human rights a judicial task? The
adjudication of the Supreme Court over issues of human rights as
opposed to this power residing in other branches of government must
be answered. While there is no direct statement regarding judicial
review in the Constitution, Marbury v.

READ:  Heroes in Homer's Poetry Essay

Madison is referenced here as
the greatest of all cases justifying this judicial power. Thus arises the
penultimate question of the authority of the Supreme Court.
Constitutional adjudication was allowed for implicitly by the Founding
Fathers. Only some of the principles of higher law were written down
in the original document; however, the distinction between those .

Choose Type of service

Choose writer quality

Page count

1 page 275 words

Deadline

Order Essay Writing

$13.9 Order Now
icon Get your custom essay sample
icon
Sara from Artscolumbia

Hi there, would you like to get such an essay? How about receiving a customized one?
Check it out goo.gl/Crty7Tt

Justification And Weaknesses Of Non-Interpretive Essay
Artscolumbia
Artscolumbia
Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model Brief: Justification and Weaknesses of the Non-Interpretive Model The question of Constitutional interpretation still has yet to be resolved. Should only the explicit commands of our nations Founding Fathers be referenced in courts of law, or can it be justified that an outside body should extrapolate from the specific text of the Constitution to define and defend additional fundamental rights? Further, if this body, nam
2019-02-12 08:16:54
Justification And Weaknesses Of Non-Interpretive Essay
$ 13.900 2018-12-31
artscolumbia.org
In stock
Rated 5/5 based on 1 customer reviews