What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

The Judges I feel do a pretty good job balancing and supporting freedom in our country. I think the fact that we do not elect them officially, allows money and corruption to play different roles in there stance.

I think having the number of Judges that we have in the Supreme Court allow for good balance within our country. And the fact the presidents appoint thee judges, allow for the presidents to have a lasting legacy.

However, the legal system as a whole appears to be flawed. It doesn't support our freedom in some ways, because as with many of parts of the government, money plays a role. Though the money may not have as big of an impact directly on the judges, money affects the lawyers and lower level state courts.

Two years ago I flew out to the east coast to see who was, at the time, my boyfriend. He was excited I was in town, and while we were driving into New York City he was showing off a little bit in his car. He was speeding, down the center of the road, and when the cop turned around to arrest him, he ran from the cops. Aggressive Driving, In-ability to maintain lane, 20+ MPH over the limit, and running from the cops were on the list of charges.  Luckily for him though, his Daddy had a big wallet and by the end of the lawyer ordeal he got charged with running a stop sign. How is that supporting my freedom? When someone who obviously made the wrong choices, who probably has no right to be on the road. He bought himself a drivers license. I ask, how is that protecting and supporting my freedom.

As with most political systems, the judicial systems support and limit freedom in our country.

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

How does the U.S. Congress, as it exists in its current structure, support and/or limit authentic representation?

I think that many of the best arguments showcasing how the U.S. Congress both supports and limits authentic representation. Early into my high school career, I had the opportunity to sit down and speak with our district representatives who sat in the Colorado Congress. I really was able to feel like she took me seriously as a citizen and that my opinions had some impact on at least the conversations that were had in congress. I do, however, fear that the same opportunities do not stand for the U.S. Congress. What's the difference between the two?

I think that there is a need to think about the change that our society is facing. Is the current set up of congress still effective for the goals of our country? I am disturbed by the role that money has taken on in our government. The recent events in Wisconsin make me sick. How do the Koch brothers have so much influence over a government, and in turn; with their checkbook they are able to affect the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. There is still good in the government, but the good is getting harder to find.

I think that one of the most evident differences is the amount of money in the two. U.S. Congress' current structure is influenced quite a bit by the capitalistic structure of our society. As the regulations on funding of political campaigns have radically shifted, I feel that the structure of the U.S. Congress has as well.

There is definitely a representative bias currently in our congress, being that the diversity in Congress is not proportional to the vast diversity of our country. I have to wonder if there is a way that the power can be more equally distributed and in turn less corrupted in our government. How can we make it that that when a party gains a majority in congress that they don't gain a full, almost monopoly, over the government.

I feel that the U.S. Congress in it's current structure, often finds itself in almost a stalemate. They sit there in filibusters arguing. The senate with write and pass a bill that then the house will throw down. Then the house will pass a bill that the senate will throw down. It's sometimes a very viscous cycle that fails to accomplish things.

In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy?

The President. He's the leading man. The one that everyone in the country talks about. He's the one that has the biggest campaign, and he's the one with the most respect. Especially in these tough times, people find it easiest to blame the President. It is his fault that the employment rates are so high. It's his fault that I have to pay so much for gas. It's his fault that my aunt cannot afford medical insurance. It's his fault.

How much control does the president really have? In what ways does the U.S. Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy? What is the role of the President and how does it affect each of us on a daily basis?

I remember when I was first learning about government, I thought that the President was our government. I've obviously learned more about American Government since then, and I'm grateful the President isn't the only figure in our government.

The President does; however, serve a very important role in the formation of our government. He is able to support the formation of an ideal government, he is able to propose and support ideas and function. He is able to agree with congress, or disagree with their thoughts. The President is also able to limit the formation of a democracy. The president is just one figure in our multi-level government and he is able to use his power of veto, and his power of authority to influence the people over the work of the congress.

I guess now that my opinion has shifted to the thoughts that the congress has the most power in our government. It is that group of people that we can select and elect to make the majority of the choices and to hold the majority of the power.

I think more than anything in America, the president represents an ideal democracy. Now, don't get me wrong. I understand that the President has an immense amount of stress on him, but I think at times he serves almost as a figure head as well. He travels, speaks, and influences people all around the world. But at the end of the day, he is just that one figure in our multi-level government.