Answer:
The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).
Explanation:
The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself.
The way to achieve this impartiality – to free judges to decide cases based on what the law actually requires, and on nothing else – is to ensure that the judiciary is independent, or, put differently, not subject to reprisals for decisions on the bench.
But judicial independence is not an absolute or singular value defining our courts. The principle of judicial restraint is equally important – and it is inextricably linked to judicial independence. At one level, the tension between the two seems inescapable. But there is an important sense in which an independent judiciary and judicial restraint are flip sides of the same coin. Both aim to minimize the influence of extraneous factors on judicial decision-making. A judge must not decide a case with an eye toward public approbation, because whether a particular result is popular is irrelevant to whether it is legally sound. In the same way, a judge must not consult
Answer: A policy of remaining apart from the affairs or interests of other groups, especially the political affairs of other countries.
Explanation:
Answer:
The ideas of the Enlightenment influenced American colonists like Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson because they read the works of Enlightenment thinkers and adopted similar views on politics and society. Political philosophers of the Enlightenment believed that using reason will guide us to the best ways to operate in order to create the most beneficial conditions for society. This included a conviction that all human beings have certain natural rights which are to be protected and preserved. The Enlightenment ideal was that individual freedom and equal rights and opportunity for all would be promoted and protected. Each individual's well-being (life, health, liberty, possessions) should be served by the way government and society are arranged. The American founding fathers accepted these Enlightenment views and acted on them.
Further detail / example:
John Locke, in his Second Treatise on Civil Government (1690), had expressed the idea of natural rights in the words that follow. Notice the similarities to what was later stated in the American colonists' <em>Declaration of Independence</em> (1776).
- <em>The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind, who will but consult it, that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions… (and) when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another.</em>
