Ukuqonda Kuyakuhlola Futhi Kulinganisele

Isimiso sokuhlola nokulinganisela yisimiso esiyisisekelo sikahulumeni wase-U.S., esiklanyelwe ukuvimbela noma iliphi igatsha elilodwa ukuba libe namandla kakhulu. Amagatsha amathathu (ahlukanisayo, awezomthetho, nahlulelo) ngalinye anemithwalo yemfanelo ehlukile nekhono lokulinganisela amandla amanye. Lomklamo waklanywa ngamabomu yizisekelo zomthetho-mthetho, ethonywe yizazi zeNjenganiso njengoMontesquieu, owathi ukwahlukanisa amandla kwakubalulekile ukuze kukhululwe. Kuyi-FOLT], ikakhulukazi 51, uJames Madiposed Kumelwe ukuba ihloselwe ukulwa isithunzi," ichaza indlela igatsha ngalinye elizomelana ngayo nezinye izindlela.

Amasheke asebenza eziqondisweni eziningi. UMongameli angawukhipha umthetho odluliswa yi-Congress; uMkhandlu ungawudlulisa lowo mthetho ngenani eliyisithathu, uqinisekisa noma ukwenqaba ukumiswa komongameli, futhi ukhiphe uMongameli. Ikomiti ingamemezela izenzo zeKhongolo noma izenzo zezikhulu ezingagunyaziwe ngokuhlola kokwahlulela. I-Congress ingaguqula isimo nobukhosi benkantolo kahulumeni (kungabe ngemva kokulungisa izinqumo), futhi uMongameli amise amajaji esizwe ngesiqinisekiso seSishaya-Hulumeni. Lesimiso sokuhlanganisa singaqinisekisa ukuthi akukho gatsha elilodwa elingabusa, kodwa ukusebenza kwayo kuxhomeke ekuzimiseleni ukulinganisa amalungelo ayo.[4] Futhi ukuthi iNkanto ephakeme iNkanto evame ukuthatha izinyathelo.

Amacala Ayinhloko Enkantolo

Ngezansi kunemithetho ephawulekayo ebonisa indlela iNkantolo Ephakeme eye yaphoqelela, yacacisa, futhi ngezinye izikhathi yalungisa ukulingana phakathi kwamagatsha. Icala ngalinye lihlolwa ngesizinda salo esiyiqiniso, ukucabanga kweNkantolo, kanye nethonya layo elihlala njalo ekuhlukaniseni kwemibuso.

Marbury v. Madison (103)

Lelicala eliyingqopha - mlando lamisa isimiso sokuhlola kokwahlulela, livumela iNkantolo Ephakeme ukuba iqede imithetho ephikisana noMthetho-sisekelo. Yabeka isibonelo sendima yeNkantolo ekuchazeni umthetho nasekuhloleni amandla amanye amagatsha. Icala lavela ekumisweni kokugcina kukaMongameli John Adams. William Marbury, uFederali, wamiswa njengobulungisa bokuthula kodwa umsebenzi wakhe awuzange udluliswe ngaphambi kokuba uThomas Jefferson athathe isikhundla. UNobhala weSizwe, uJames Mary, wenqaba ukulidlulisela ngokuqondile. UMarbury walethwa ngokuqondile eNkantolo Ephakeme ngaphansi kweJadiary ka-1789, owanika iNkantolo ukuba impikiswano yeNkantolo ukuba ikhiphe amandla enkantolo embazweni yendoda eyaziwa ngomthetho.

UMahluleli omkhulu uJohn Marshall wabhekana nenkinga: ukuyala ukuba uMadison adlulise le khomishane cishe kungashaywa mkhuba, kulimaza igunya leNkantolo. Kunalokho, uMarshall wanquma ukuthi iMarbury yayinelungelo lokuya ekhomishaneni yakhe kodwa ingxenye yoMthetho weSikhathi sikaJudiary yayivumela iNkantolo ukuba ilalele ngokuqondile icala ngokusemthethweni ngoba yandisa igunya leNkanto leNkantolo leSinambalo ngaphezu kwalokho iSiphakamiso III soMthetho-mthetho owawuvunyelwe. Ngesikhathi sokuqala, iNkantolo Ephakeme yashaya isenzo soMkhandlu. Marshall wabhala ngodumo ukuthi "isifunda esiqinile isifunda nesibopho somnyango sokwahlulela sokusho ukuthi umthetho uyini." Lelicala landisa indima eqinile yeNkantolo yeNkantolo njengegatsha elilinganayo yokuhlola kokubili i-Greastrust.

McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)

Kulendaba, iNkantolo Ephakeme yasekela amandla eSishaya-mthetho sokwakha ibhange lesizwe futhi yaphika umbuso weMaryland ilungelo lokulikhokha. Lesi sinqumo saqinisa ukuphakama komthetho kahulumeni phezu komthetho kahulumeni futhi saqinisekisa amandla ombuso kaHulumeni. Icala laqala lapho uMaryland efaka intela egatsheni laseBaltimore eBank yesibini yase-United States, enethemba lokuyixosha ebhizinisini. UJames McCulloch, imboni yebhanki, yenqaba ukukhokha intela. Izinkantolo zikahulumeni zamnqumela, futhi icala lafika eNkantolo Ephakeme.

Ibhala iNkantolo yeNkantolo ehlangene, uMahluleli Omkhulu Marshall wagomela ngokuthi nakuba uMthetho-sisekelo ungawunikanga ngokuqondile amandla okwakha ibhange, wanika uMkhandlu amandla okufeza amandla awo akhankanyiweyo "adingekile nafanelekile". Ibhange laliyithuluzi elifanele lokulawula izindaba zesizwe. Emfuno yentela. UMarshall wanquma ukuthi "amandla entela ahilela amandla okubhubhisa," futhi njengoba uMthetho-mthetho-sisekelo nemithetho-omthetho uphakeme, ngeke iphazamise imisebenzi kahulumeni. [ulkloch] v. Mary[FLT] uyisibonelo esingokomthetho sokuhlola ukulwa kwezwe, ukusekela umbuso okusetshenziswa ekumelaneni umbuso, ukuhlola isimo sokulawula, ukuhlola isimo sombuso, nokuqinisa amandla ekwambusweni kwemithetho engokomthetho. I-FLT. futhi i-Grectived prosedmigranced produced produced projectivedmentssion.

Intsha ewumqulu ophezulu & iTube Co. v. Sawyer (1952)

Lelicala lahlola ngokuqondile imingcele yamandla obumongameli phakathi nesimo esiphuthumayo sesizwe. Ngo-1952, phakathi neMpi yaseKorea, uMongameli uHarry Truman wakhipha umyalo wokuthatha izinsimbi eziningi zezwe ukuze kuvinjelwe ukugadla okungaphazamisa ukukhiqizwa kwempi. Izinkampani zensimbi zamangalela, ziphikisa ngokuthi uMongameli wayengenalo igunya elingokomthetho lokuthatha impahla yomuntu siqu ngaphandle kokugunyaza umthetho.

INkantolo Ephakeme, esinqumweni, yasekela izinkampani zensimbi. IJaji uHugo Black labhala ukuthi umyalo kaTruman wawungasebenzi ngoba amandla kaMongameli kumelwe avele esenzweni soMkhandlu noma kuMthetho-sisekelo ngokwawo. UKhomishane ucabangela futhi wenqaba ngokuqondile ukunikeza uMongameli igunya lokuthatha izikhawu zemisebenzi ngenkani zeTaft-Hartley Act. INkantolo yagcizelela ukuthi uMongameli, njengoMphathi-Chiefa, akanawo amandla aphuthumayo angenamkhawulo ongenakulinganiswa. Umthetho odumile kaRobert Jackson uyavuma uvule isakhiwo esinemikhakhakha yempasi yempasi yempathi yempathi yempasigila yezenzo zokulawula impatho: lapho uMongameli ethatha imvume yokugunyaza umthetho, amandla akhe kakhulu; lapho enza ingasebenzi ekulahlekelweni kwemvume (umeomcle"""), umphumela wesimo sohlu; umendekumendelwe izimo, futhi umende izinquzukumende yamandla wakhe, ulingana nemithetho.[10] uyavuma

Brown v. Board of Education (1954)

Lelicala lamemezela ukwahlukana ngokohlanga ezikoleni zomphakathi ngokungekhona kwesivumelwano, ligumbuqela isibonelo esabekwa nguPellesy v. Ferguson. Isinqumo sabonisa amandla eNkantolo okubekela inselele nokuguqula imithetho ephula amalungelo abantu, esebenza njengesehlo esibucayi emthethweni kahulumeni. Brown eqinisweni [i-flce] yahlanganisa amacala amane ahlukene eKansas, eSouth Carolina, eVirginia, naseDelaware. Abaholi baphikisa ukuthi izikole ezithathelwe umthetho womthetho wombuso zazingalingani, i-fault Claus weSivice se-Grametic Rendement.

IJaji eliyinhloko u-Earl Warren, ebhalela iNkantolo ehlangene, yathola ukuthi ukuhlukanisa phakathi kwemfundo yomphakathi kwabangela umuzwa wokungabalulekile oye walimaza abantwana abamnyama. INkantolo yamemezela ukuthi "ukuhlukanisa izakhiwo zemfundo akulingani ngokwemvelo." lesi sinqumo saphikisana ngokuqondile "imfundiso kodwa ilingana" nemfundiso [. Ferguson [1866] [186] [i-96] [i-969] [i-i-i-pane-inguquko yezwe], iNkakhulu leNkantolo yahlola amandla ka-Prouni yase-Prount (indelmssss) yemithetho kahulumeni eyaye-Crow, ifaka futhi i-Genetic Active Active Act: [F], futhi yabeka kanjani amagunya emithetho ka-644] ekuboniseni amalungelo emithetho ka-Ovigartivential: [F], [F], izinqulugame], futhi

URade (1973)

Roe v. Wade waqaphela ilungelo lowesifazane lokukhetha ukukhipha isisu ngaphansi kwelungelo lokuba wedwa. Lesi sinqumo sabonisa indima yeNkantolo Ephakeme ekuvikeleni inkululeko yomuntu siqu ekuphazanyisweni uhulumeni, ukubonisa ukulinganisela phakathi kwamalungelo abantu nezithakazelo zikahulumeni. Icala lalihilela "Jane Roe" (Norma McCorvey), owesifazane waseTexas owabekela umthetho kahulumeni inselele ukukhishwa kwesisu ngaphandle kokusindisa ukuphila kukamama. Inkantolo, esibhalwe nguMahluleli uHarry Blackmun, yakholelwa ukuthi ilungelo lokungasese, elivezwa yi-Creaus Programme ye-Gray ye-Gray Demestry, yenza isinqumo sowesifazane sokuqeda kwakhe ukukhubazeka.

INkantolo yathatha uhlelo olulula: kweyokuqala i-FLT, umbuso awukwazanga ukulawula ukukhishwa kwesisu; okwesibili, ungalawula kuphela ukuvikela impilo kamama; kweyesithathu, ngemva kokuphumelela, ingavimbela ukukhishwa kwesisu ngaphandle kokusindisa ukuphila kukamama. Roe [i-ROT] [i-od] isebenza njengesehlo kuhulumeni owesizwe owenziwe ngecala lokukhipha isisu, futhi yanqanda negatsha elikhulu ekubekeni imithetho enjalo. Nokho, isinqumo sabangela ukuphamba okukhulu kwezombangazwe okuqhubeka kuze kube lolu suku. [inani elingaphezulu kwamashumi eminyaka] Icala labekwa ngokunye i-FLT] [FLD:] [FLD] [5] [imperectives .[5] Isilinganiso sesilinganiso se-sterobources `Ault]

United States v. Nixon (1974)

Lelicala lakhuluma ngemingcele yamandla kamongameli nesimiso sokuthi akekho ongaphezulu komthetho. INkantolo Ephakeme yanquma ukuthi uMongameli uNixon kwadingeka avule amakhasethi aqoshiwe ahlobene nehlazo laseWatergate, aqinise igunya lejaji lokuhlola amandla omphathi. Phakathi nophengululo lwaseWatergate, amakhasethi akhethekile omshushisi ezingxoxo zeWhite House. UNixon waveza ilungelo lokuba izikhulu, waveza ukuthi izingxoxo zaziyimfihlo nokuthi isikhulu futhi ijaji lalingenalo igunya lokuphoqa izingxoxo zabo.

Esinqumweni esihlangene sesi-8-10. Inkantolo yayala uNixie Rehnquist waquary, uMahluleli omkhulu uWarren Burger wasekela ukuthi nakuba kunelungelo eliphetheyo lokuvikela ibutho lezempi, lezokuxhumana, noma imfihlo yokhuseleko lwesizwe, ilungelo elivamile lokufihla imfihlo alikwazanga ukudlula isidingo esiqondile sobufakazi ekuqulweni kobugebengu. INkantolo yayala uNixon ukuba aphendule amakhasethi, ayenobufakazi bokuhileleka kukaMongameli esifubeni. I-Nixon i-Prence, futhi amakhasethi aholela ekulahleni kwakhe ngokushesha ngemva kwalokho. United States v. Nix iyisibonelo esikhulu sokuhlola kwegatsha ngokuphumelelayo. Iqinisekisa ukuthi uMongameli akancinti we-protedmistry enqule yomthetho futhi usebenza ehhovisi eliphezulu.

I - INS v. Chanha (1983)

Lelicala labulala i-veto ye-gional, i-Congress yezomthetho yasebenzisa amashumi eminyaka ukugumbuqela izenzo zegatsha eziphethe ngaphandle kokushaya umthetho omusha. Icala lalihilela uJagdish Rai Chanha, umfundi waseKenya owayesalokhu ekhona imvume yakhe. I-Immigation and Naturaltifization Service (INS) yasusa ukudingiswa kwakhe, kodwa i House of Deaults yadlulisa isinqumo esakhipha leyo mvume ngaphansi kwelungiselelo le-Immigration ne-Nationality Act.

INkantolo ePhakeme yanquma ukuthi i-veto yemithetho ye-avior yaphula ukwahlukana kwemibuso yomthetho-mthetho. IJaji eliyinhloko iBurger labhala ukuthi uMkhandlu ungawushintsha umthetho noma ugumbuqele izenzo zezikhulu ngenqubo yemithetho egcweleyo . Ukudluliswa kwazo zombili izindlu nokunikezwa uMongameli ukuze zisayine noma zidluliswe. Ukuvumela indlu eyodwa ukuba isebenzise izinqumo zezikhulu kwadlula imfuneko ye-bito ye-Breaster ne-veto demoritions. I-INS v. [[[ ishiye isilinganiso semigomo efana ne-oggrandsstotototo ku-previdect 200. Icala elihlolayo lokulawula igunya nokubuyisela umthetho womthetho.

Clinton v. City of New York (1998)

Lelicala lahlola i-Line Inter Veto Act ka-1996, eyanika uMongameli amandla okusula inzuzo ethile yokusebenzisa imali nentela ngemva kokusayina incwadi yefabeti yomthetho. UMongameli Clinton wasebenzisa i-line train transmet verto ukusula amalungiselelo amathathu, kuhlanganise negebe lentela leDolobha laseNew York nelungiselelo leMedicaidr. Idolobha namanye amaqembu athintekile ayeseyangena.

INkantolo Ephakeme, esinqumweni esingu-616-3, yathi i-Act yavumela uMongameli ukuba aphinde athathe ingxenye yomthetho ka-Claus we-Constitution. Ibhalela iningi, uMahluleli John Paul Stevens wachaza ukuthi uMongameli kumelwe asayine noma akhiphe incwadi yonke; akanakuyibhala noma ayibhale ngemva kwengxenye. I-gasmethi le-metam yavumela uMongameli ukuba aphinde athathe izingxenye zomthetho ngaphandle kokudlula e-bidaralism nasekwenzeni inqubo efunekayo ukuze kubekwe umthetho. [[FLT.FL.0] Clinton v. City laseNew York alihlola ngisho nesilinganiso se-Proversession futhi waqinisekisa indima ekhethekile yegatsha ekulungiseni umthetho. Icala futhi libonisa ukuzimisela kwemithetho yeNkadebethi yemithetho ebhishone, lapho i-Predeli kanye ne-Prence i-bugnessting.

Shelby County v. Hoker (2013)

Lelicala lakhuluma ngokulinganisela phakathi kombuso kahulumeni nobukhosi bezwe ngaphansi komthetho weVoing Rights Act ka-1965. I-Act yayidinga amazwe athile nezindawo ezinomlando wokucwasana ngokohlanga ekuvoteni ukuze kutholakale imvume kahulumeni ("preclaration") ngaphambi kokushintsha noma yimiphi imithetho yokuvota. Inqubo yokukhokha yayisekelwe ekwazisweni kusukela ngo-1964 no-1971. i-Shelby County, i-Alabama, yabekela inselele lendlela ngokuthi ayihambisangancitomistigani.

IJaji eliyinhloko uJohn Roberts, ebhala ngo 5-44, walahla uhlelo lokukhokha, ethi luphula isimiso sobukhosi obulinganayo bombuso futhi alwasenakuthethelelwa ngezimo zamanje. INkantolo yagcizelela ukuthi uhulumeni wezwe ngeke ubeke umthwalo onjalo ezindaweni ezisekelwe ebufakazini obuphelelwe yisikhathi. UKhongolo lungadala indlela entsha, kodwa yayingalishintshi ilungiselelo. [Shelby County v. Raker[FLY:1] wahlola amandla kahulumeni wezwe lonke (`bosesbose Congresssion negatsha lesikhulu lifaka izivumelwano zokuvota.) ukusabela kwe--mthetho okungavumelanisela phambili i-mthetho ukuthatha futhi ukuthatha isinyathelo sokuthatha isinyathelo sokuqondisa amalungelo embubhisi. Isinqumo samandla kakhulu phakathi kwe-sembusandlu-nkulu yokhetho, ihola izimpi ezingokomthetho zemithetho yokuvota kanye ne-ota.

UJackson Women’s Health Organization (2022)

Lesi sinqumo samuva nje esiphawulekayo sahlehla Roe v. Wade kanye nesinqumo esibhalwe nguMahluleli uSamuel Alito . Casey, siphethe ukuthi uMthetho-sisekelo awunikezi ilungelo lokukhipha isisu. Icala lalihilela umthetho we-Missississippi onqabela ukukhishwa kwezisu eziningi ngemva kwamasonto angu-15 okukhulelwe. Inkantolo, esingu-6-6-3 sinqumo esibhalwe nguMahluleli uSamuel Alito, yanquma ukuthi igunya lokulawula ukukhishwa kwezisu ezisusweni zabantu nabameleli babo abakhethiwe, hhayi abameleli.

UMahluleli u-Atalito waphikisa ngokuthi ilungelo lokukhipha isisu lalingasekelwenga kakhulu emlandweni wesizwe futhi alicacile emqondweni wenkululeko egunyaziwe. Ngokubuyisela umbuzo ezifundazweni, iNkantolo yawudlulisela ngokuphumelelayo itshekisi lemithetho yokukhipha isisu enqubweni yomthetho. [Izinqamu] ziyisibonelo esiphawulekayo sokuvimbela ukwahlulela noma ukukhipha izisu] imingcele. Ngokuyibuyisela iNkanto enqabela ukugcinwa kwayo imthetho wemithetho ngaphambili. Ibonisa futhi amandla ashukumisayo amasheke nezimiso ze-acers: izibondawo zokukhipha isisu manje, nakuba uMkhandlu wesizwe ungayidlulisa umthetho kahulumeni noma ukukhipha isisu ngokusholo noma ngokulinganisela (iphethe imingcele ye-mthetho). Isinqumo ngokwaso ngokwaso sabangela ukuphikisana okukhulu kwezenzo zezombangazwe eziseqeshisiwe ezimisweni zeNkalweni zeze-Hundlu yezomthetho.

Ithonya Lezinqumo ZeNkantolo Ephakeme Ngokuhlukana Kwamandla

Izinqumo ezenziwa yiNkantolo Ephakeme zinemiphumela efinyelela kude emthetho nasemphakathini. Abaxazululi nje kuphela izimpikiswano ezikhethekile zomthetho kodwa futhi balungisa isimiso somphakathi futhi bathonye ukulinganisela kwamandla phakathi kwamagatsha kahulumeni. Madison [[FLT]] wanikeza iNkantolo isikhali sokugcina somba [[FFLT:] [FFLT]] [FFLT] imingcele ebekwe emandleni ombuso, kuyilapho [FLT:] v.[FLT] [FLT] [FLT] [FLT] [5] [f] [f] ne-CM] yenkangelelo yomthetho.[2]

Ngaphezu kwalokho, izinqumo zeNkantolo zingashukumisela amanye amagatsha ukuba enze okuthile. Ngemva [kwe-FLT:0] Brown v. Ibhodi yemfundo, iSishaya-ngqungquthela sidlulise umthetho wamalungelo omphakathi ophawuliwe. Shelby County, iNdlu idlulise amalungelo amasha okuvota (uJohn Vocting Acription Act), nakuba ingakabi ngumthetho. Ngemva [[FLT: 4.] AmaDobs , amaningana ashukushukuswe ukuvikela noma ukukhipha isisu, nengqungquthelana ecabangela ukukhishwa kwesisu. Ukudlala phakathi kwamagatsha awahlanga; iyaguquka ngesinqumo ngasinye noma ngesikhuluminya.

Abagxeki ngezinye izikhathi baphikisa ngokuthi iNkantolo Ephakeme isebenzisa amandla amakhulu ngokumisa imithetho yedemokrasi. Abanye baphikisa ngokuthi iNkantolo kufanele ibe nonya kakhulu ekuvikeleni amalungelo, ikakhulukazi uma amanye amagatsha ehluleka ukuthatha isinyathelo. Bobabili baqaphela ukuthi indima yejaji ekuhloleni nasekulinganiseni ibangela ukuphikisana okungokwemvelo. Abasemqoka babehlolele ukuba kube ngendlela `aa mandla kodwa ephoqelelwe ukuba asebenze ngaphakathi komthetho-sisekelo. Izibonelo ezingenhla zibonisa ukuthi izinqumo zeNkantolo azivamile; zivame ukubangela ukusabela kwezinye izigaba, ziqinisekisa ingxoxo eqhubekayo ngemingcele yegunya likahulumeni.

Isiphetho

Izehlulelo zeNkantolo Eziphakeme zisebenza njengezibonelo ezigxekayo zendlela yokuhlola nokulinganisela okusebenza ngayo e-United States. Ngokuchaza uMthetho-sisekelo nangokuqinisekisa ukuthi igatsha ngalinye likahulumeni lisebenza phakathi kwemingcele yalo, iNkantolo Ephakeme yenza indima ebalulekile ekulondolozeni umthetho nasekuvikeleni amalungelo abantu ngabanye. [[[FLT:]] ukusukela ku-Maribury v. Madison[ ku- [[FLT]] [i-Dobs v. Jackson’s Health , iNkantolo ibonise ngokuphindaphindiwe igunya lokuchaza imingcele yamandla kahulumeni, ngokusekela ukukhohloka kwesikhulu, ukupha okushaya isikhulu, noma ukubuyisela izinqumo enqubweni yezombangazwe. Ukuqonda lezizimo ezifuna ukuphikisa nokuncintisana nomthetho wezweyo. [[5]]