1.In what ways is the court system better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government (such as Congress and the President; or the Mayor of NYC and the NYC City Assembly)? Give an example to illustrate your argument.

The court system is indeed better suited to protect the individual rather than any other branches of government because the court systems give the rights to suspects protecting their own rights or prove themselves innocent. About 90% of all cases were being heard by the state courts, any cases that the state courts are unable to come up with a decision will be heard by the federal courts. In other words, if there are any arguments, they will appeal to the Supreme Courts. That means if the suspect is sentenced by the local court, they can appeal to the Supreme Court for their rights. Because any perceived violation of a liberty protected by the Bill of Right, such as remain silent or the protection against cruel and any unusual punishment. For example, the case Miranda v. Arizona. At the beginning he signed a confession without knowing his civil rights which was a violation of  his constitutional rights. Because the police had violated Miranda’s Fifth Amendment right against self – incrimination, and his Sixth Amendment right to an attorney. As a result Miranda’s conviction confession was overturned. In general, after being arrested, suspects are easily nervous and anxious about being sentenced. The misleading of the police makes them think it might be a good way for them to cooperate with police. Therefore, Miranda rights can relieve the suspect’s psychological pressure and it is a good example to protect individuals by the court system.

2.Think about how federal judges get to become judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic PLACES IN OUR GOVERNMENT. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)

I believe that federal judges selected are anti democratic. The way they are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate is very similar with “Federalist #10”, wealthy people and superior intelligence play a leading role in our government system. However, in my point of view, they should be voted by citizens like the president being elected in the U.S. Because federal judges work for people and their cavil rights, only the people themselves know what their desires are. Moreover, the capitalist or wealthy might never experience what the people suffer. So the people question whether the federal judges selected by wealth can really protect them from inequality? The responsibilities of federal judges are divine as they represent all Americans’ voices, and the final decisions from the courts should represent the rightness purpose, no matter wealthy or poor.