[sjb2k1]

imo the judiciary

protecting the rights of the minority is a huge reason for my opinion

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by knash9

I'm going to argue legislative, to change it up. I could quote Hamilton but I'm on mobile.

The judicial can't actively do anything. It can only restrain the other two branchs. Legislative is harder to control and that's what gives it it's power. It also faces less public scrutiny than the executive.

Should be fun discussion.

hmm good point about the judiciary

but they had the power to gut obamacare, just as one example of their power - you can make all the laws you want but the court will strike your ass down

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by knash9

My only problem with that is that Obamacare would have never existed, or any law that has been upheld or stuck down by the courts, would not even exist without the legislative branch.

damn founding fathers and their checks and balances!

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by loveisdead

The house has tried over 30 times to overrule ACA.

but they dont have enough powahhhh

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by J.C.

The Executive has the power to select the Judiciary.

but they can rule on cases however they want - and perhaps not in accordance with the views of political party that nominated them.

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by jawstheme

Legislature definitely has more potential power than the SC. If the SC rules a way they don't like they can amend the constitution and then the SC can't do shit.

nah dude, think prop 8...that's a constitutional amendment that was ruled unconstitutional and has fiiiiinally gotten to scotus

[sjb2k1]

Originally Posted by jawstheme

Thats a state constitution. An amendment to the Constitution (federal) becomes part of the Constitution and can't be stricken by the
SC, only interpreted.

fair enough

[sjb2k1]

that is an excellent thought about the legislature!