The Federalist, No. 78 Judicial review

The Federalist, No. 78 Judicial review

Alexander Hamilton believes the federal judicature needs reforms, and the only question is how and the extent to constitute it. How to constitute, he notes it includes the mode of appointing, their tenure and separation of judicial powers between different courts to each other. For the way of appointing, he believes it’s the same as of any officers of the Union. Whereas the tenure looks into the duration of the judges; stay in office, their support systems and upholding personal moral responsibilities. State’s Constitution appointed judges must be on good behavior as guided by the Constitution.

The government made up of executive, legislature and judiciary with the judiciary being the weakest. According to Hamilton, “neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment,” and depends on the executive. Judiciary cannot fight the two successfully and must be in a position to defend attacks from the two departments. Being truly independent will ensure the liberty of the people is not compromised. Judiciary is the least dangerous to constitutional rights with the least power to injure them. With judiciary, liberty has nothing to be afraid of but has everything to fear from a union with the other government departments of power.

The judiciary needs to be completely independent based on the limited Constitution. The Constitution does not specified authority except for a few cases. According to Hamilton, “Limitations of this kind can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice.” The courts medium is the only way to rights and privileges and declare any contrary authority void. For cases of statues clashing in the Constitution, the judiciary discretion in determining the contradictory laws is supreme guided by the Constitution.