Question

What is the difference in separation of powers and checks and balances?

Answer 1

Answer for your first question:

• Separation of powers refers to each branch of government having their own distinct powers, while checks and balances refers to the ability of each branch to prevent another branch from becoming too powerful.

For your second question:

Read more on Brainly.com - brainly.com/question/8033338#readmore

[Proper form on Brainly is to ask just one question per post.]

Explanation in regard to your first question:

The "separation of powers" principle was an idea embedded into the plans for American government by our founding fathers, based on their reading of Enlightenment political theory.  The terminology "separation of powers" was introduced by Charles-Louis de Secondat, the Baron of Montesquieu.  (Usually he's referred to as just "Montesquieu.")  He wrote an important work of political theory called The Spirit of the Laws, published in 1748.

Within his treatment of how governments will function best, Montesquieu argued that executive, legislative, and judicial functions of government ought to be divided between parts of the government, so that no one person or division of the government can infringe on the overall rights of others in the government or of the members of the society overall.  The framers of the United States Constitution embedded the separation of powers into the plan for US government.

As noted by The History Channel, "In addition to this separation of powers, the framers built a system of checks and balances designed to guard against tyranny by ensuring that no branch would grab too much power."  Some examples of the checks and balances used would be:

• Congress (the Legislative Branch) controls the government's budget, so the Executive Branch needs Congress's support to fund any of its desired initiatives.
• The President nominates federal officials, but those nominations must be confirmed by the Senate.
• The President has the ability to veto laws passed by Congress, requiring a two-thirds majority to override his veto.
• The Supreme Court and other federal courts (the Judicial Branch of government) can rule that laws passed by Congress or executive orders by the President are unconstitutional, blocking their implementation.