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 elected branches of government, such as the Congress, the president, the mayor of New York City, and the NYC City Assembly, are less suited to safeguard the person than the court system. By contesting unconstitutional laws, the legal system upholds individual liberties and rights. For instance, the judicial department, which establishes and upholds fairness, equality, and liberty, has done the most to protect the rights of the person. Unlike elected officials, who are formally tied to the public, the U.S. Supreme Court is not. As a result, the legal system is better fitted to safeguard the rights and liberties of the individual because it does so.

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.)

Since they reject democratic decision-making, freedom of speech, equality before the law, and social justice as some of the guiding principles or purposes of a just society, I do believe that the supreme court is the most anti-democratic part of the government. They continue acting in this manner, in my opinion, because they want the government to continue operating in the same manner; they do not want anything to change for their own gain. The Supreme Court in my opinion is indeed an anti-democratic branch of our government. This is due to the fact that the judges on the Supreme Court are appointed rather than chosen by the general public, causing their interests to reflect those of the president in office and their refusal to uphold the US Constitution, which is occasionally not in the interests of the majority. There is always an opposing side, and no single group has control of the government, but it is still the wealthy who control the government and protect liberties because they hold a dominant position in our political system and choose judges based on who at the time has the same political rhetoric and has previously served as judges at the federal level.

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 better suited to protect individuals than the elected branches of government are because they focus more on protecting individual’s rights for example it is fine for someone being questioned by an officer to remain silent because it is a right they have while on the other hand  An example the article stated was when someone commits a criminal act, the government (state or national, depending on which law has been broken) charges that person with a crime such as the Miranda v. Arizona case which included both of these examples. Each person has more than just one court system ready to protect his or her rights which is beneficial for them.

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 definitely believe that the supreme court is an anti-democratic part of the government and a reason for this and choosing the judges in federal courts has to do with the wealthy class and people who own property and businesses. I believe that they are so focused on what benefits them and how they can maintain or get richer which has to do with why they don’t agree with many choices that democrats make.

1. The court system is 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) because we have rights that protect citizens from the government. Our first amendment right is the freedom to speech, press and religion that protects us as citizens because we have the right to say what we want without any consequence except for slander and libel. 
2. Yes, I believe that the supreme court is the anti democratic part of the government because they don’t agree with democratic decision-making, freedom of expression, equality before the law, social justice, equality, and social justice are some of the principles or ideals that define a fair society. I think that they stay this way because they want to keep the government the same way, they don’t want things to change only to benefit them.

When thinking about our government, I definitely think of unfairness, whether that be with certain people appointed or how they deal with issues in our society. What is unfair is you don’t know what said person will do with power until they’re on the job. They do not have to give us what we want, but they are held accountable if they are elected officials. The only accountability we have as citizens is to vote them out of office.  To become a federal judge said person needs to be appointed by the president and the approval of the Senate(Which we vote into office). So in a sense, some of this is anti-democratic because we live in a democratic republic and we the people have the right to vote for members of the senate that (should) speak for us, if they don’t for whatever reason, the people have the power to vote them out when the time comes.

1. Overall, the court system is better suited to protect individuals than any of the elected branches of the government. This is true because to begin with human rights are highly protected within court rooms and are in effect. Also, disputes are not influenced by public opinion. For example, if a person were to be inside a court room in the event of a case being discussed, they can practice the right to remain silent under the fifth amendment and they would not be punished for it.
2. Although it may be widely viewed that the supreme court may be anti-democratic for allowing the different individuals such as judges, presidents, mayors and other members of the government pertaining to a branch, I completely disagree on this matter. I believe that people within the realm of having this responsibility are not to be chosen by the public but rather by those who are in the same field and have related knowledge. The main reason why judges are chosen in federal courts is due to the fact that they are in office for life. As a result, it is only right that they go through a strict process of being confirmed by the united states senate as deemed by the U.S. constitution.

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.

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’m originally from Recife, Brazil but I migrated to the US at 6 years old. I’m twenty years old and I’m not really a fan of the city life. I’m very excited to start this semester. I’m strictly doing online classes so I can work full time. I plan on getting really good grades so I can transfer to a four year, and do double major. I want to study Business and Writing. I would like to learn more about business and go back and give to the community I’m originally from. I want to continue pursuing my passion of writing political criticism and fiction stories. During the pandemic I started research work for my book on racism in America. I focused on the evolution of political ideologies and white supremacy. Wrote about three chapters until I became overwhelmed with everything I was reading on the subject. Speaking and learning about politics is one of my passions and I’m excited for what this class has instore for me.