The constitution of the US is the absolute law of the nation, which acts as a guide to the political culture of the Americans and the law. They are many issues that have been addressed in the constitution of the US, some have been amended a number of times to fit the needs of the society.
Abortion is a good example of an issue that has been addressed in the constitution; it has also been amended a number of times. Under the constitution, the president has a number of privileges, which will be discussed in this paper. The constitution plays a significant role of creating a balance on most pressing issues and making sure that America remains a democratic state.
President’s enumerated powers. In the US, the president has special powers, which have been formalized. The authorities of any president of the US are carefully limited and have been well outlined in the constitution of the US. The president has the power to appoint executives, federal juries, and American ambassadors among other officers of the government.
This power is also referred as the enumerated power of a president. Using the enumerated powers, the president of the US can negotiate treaties with other governments and can even recognize ambassadors from other countries. He or she can also veto bills that are passed in the assembly. As such, the enumerated powers are special authorities, which are exercised by a sitting president and are well-outlined in the constitution.
Special powers available to the president: The American president has several powers: these powers include those that are granted by the constitution, by the Acts of Congress, and other soft powers given to the President as the leader of the nation.
Emergency powers. Emergency powers are categorized into two groups. The two groups of powers are (a) a special power to act during the time of crisis, which is fully based on the president’s decision and (b) the special power to act according to the constitution or formal laws when an emergency has been announced in the nation.
Executive powers. In the executive branch, the president has been allowed by the constitution to manage a wide range of national affairs. Therefore, the president issues rules and instructions, which have a certain force although they never require approval by the congress. An excellent example of executive powers of a president in the US is using the veto on a certain bill that the he (president) does not approve.
Inherent powers. In the constitution, there are certain statements that can allow the president to have power. A statement like ….the executive power shall be vested in a president…. allows a national leader to practice some form of authority. Regulating immigration, acquiring a territory, and ordering deportation of some individuals are examples of inherent powers by the US president.
Is exercise of these powers a positive or negative influence? The president of the US exercises enumerated powers for the good of the citizens and the nation at large. During an emergency, for instance, there is a need to make quick decisions in order to address the situation. However, the congress can take long to make, and implement such decisions and it is, therefore, a positive aspect that the president should make decisions during such critical moments.
Does the president have too much power? In the recent times, the citizens of the US (some of them) feel that the president has become too powerful. Some people argue that the president has so much power that the democratic system is under threat. However, this is not entirely true.
The powers of any American president are set by the constitution and, therefore, the president cannot exercise his powers outside what has been allowed by the constitution. The constitution also prevents the president from using his privileges wrongly. This means that the president cannot breach the rights of the constitution and those of the American citizens. The president does not have too much power.
Differences between judicial activism and judicial restraint: The judicial activism and judicial restraints are antagonistic; the two terms are quite different from each other (. They are both relevant in the US as they relate to the American judicial system. These two are very significant in checking and controlling the powers of the government; they help check fraudulence.
The term judicial activism refers to how the constitution is interpreted in order to campaign for certain values and conditions in a nation. On the other hand, the term judicial restraint refers to the act of limiting the powers of federal judges so that they cannot strike down certain laws in national affairs. In issues of judicial activism, the federal juries are supposed to utilize their powers to correct injustices in the social system only when the other constitutional bodies are in-active.
Therefore, the judicial activism plays a significant role in creating and developing social policies on matters of political injustice, civil liberties and public morality. On the other hand, in the judicial restraint, the court allows the congress and state legislatures to continue with their duties, but can hold them back if they are violating the laws and constitution of the US.
The judicial restraint and judicial activism are also different in that they have different objectives. The judicial restraint creates a balance in the judicial, executive, and legislative issues while the judicial activism give powers to all arms of the government to overrule certain acts in the constitution.
Weakness and strengths of judicial activism. Some of the key benefits of judicial activism are: (a) to promote democracy by following what is only outlined in the constitution, (b) the judicial activism allows judges to stand firm on certain decisions because the constitution obligates them to do so, and lastly, (c) the judicial activism allows courts to supervise and implement laws, which is part of the democracy. The weakness of the activism is that its reliability is questionable and, therefore, it should be analyzed.
Weakness and strengths of judicial restraints. One of the benefits of judicial restraints is that it allows judges to exercise their authority; this is a form of democracy. This particular right allows the juries to defend the constitution as much as possible. It also allows federal judges to decline to make a ruling on some of the controversial matters. This, however, is usually considered a violation of the constitution, which is a major weakness of the judicial restraint.
The preferred method. The preferred method is judicial activism because it promotes democracy and allows the judges to make and implement decisions as well as standing firm on their rulings.
History of abortion law and its current status in America. Abortion is very common in the society, and it is estimated that almost half the population of American women have at one time terminated a pregnancy voluntarily. History about abortion reveals that during the 1800s, abortion was legal in the US, but towards the end of the 19th century, the abortion act was amended and abortion was criminalized by the constitution.
The constitution banned all forms abortions after the fourth month of pregnancy. Regardless, the number of illegal abortions was relatively high but when the Comstock law was implemented, the number of illegal abortions declined at an alarming rate. During this period, some feminists (including Susan Antony) were strongly against abortion and their work helped in the war against abortion.
In the year 1965, the US banned all forms of abortion but this ban varied from one to state to another. Even though, abortion was only allowed under specific conditions which include (a) to save the mother’s life, (b) in case the pregnancy was as a result of rape, (c) if the fetus had some complications or abnormalities like deformity.
In the year 1973, the Supreme Court said that all the laws on abortion were unconstitutional and it, therefore, allowed abortion within the first three months. Some celebrated this ruling while others including the Catholic Church opposed it. This led to wars and bombing of clinics that exercised abortion. Today, the conflict about abortion revolves around over termination of fetus at the late stages of pregnancy. Supporters argue that such an abortion is good because it saves the mother’s life.
On the other hand, opponents argue that in a majority of the abortions, the fetus can be saved and people only abort as an excuse that the health of the mother is at risk. Presently, abortion is legal in more than fifty states in the US. The issue of mother’s health, which allows the mother to abort even at the late stages of a pregnancy, is a broad one, and it does not have a single answer. As a result, there is no particular reason why a mother cannot abort.
Do you agree with the present status of abortion law? The issue of abortion has brought controversy in the US today. Abortion has become a critical issue in the society with many abortions been done every day. I feel that some people abort voluntarily although they argue that the health of the mother is at risk. This continues to victimize innocent and vulnerable fetus, and the law does not protect them. Therefore, there is a need define and to develop new laws regarding abortion. I do not agree with the current law on abortion.
Conclusion
The president of the US has some form of special powers, which allow him to make important decisions during critical moments. The special powers of a president are granted by the constitution, by the Acts of Congress, and other soft powers. Such decisions are applicable during times of emergency.
The term judicial activism refers to how the constitution is interpreted in order to advocate for certain values and conditions (in the US) while judicial restraint refers to the act of limiting the power of federal judges so that they cannot strike down certain laws, which are outlined by the constitution. The major benefit of these two is that they promote democracy in the US.
The issue of abortion has been (and still is) a burning issue in the society today. Presently, in more than fifty states abortion is allowed by the constitution. There is a need to develop laws regarding abortion to avoid the controversy surrounding this topic.