Hamilton's Judicial Branch

In Federalist 78 Hamilton defends the Constitution’s lifetime tenure of Justices on the Supreme Court. In doing so Hamilton argues that, because of the Court’s particular role and purpose, appointing Justices for life poses no threat to republican governance. To start, Hamilton identifies the duty of the Court as, “to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void,” this is what becomes Hamilton’s definition of judicial review. Those who opposed the Constitution, Antifederalists, argued that the power of judicial review was far too great to be wielded by Justices appointed for life. In response to this Hamilton argued as to why lifetime tenure was, “an indispensable ingredient in,” the efficacy of the Judiciary. According to Hamilton the Judiciary was, “the weakest of the three departments of power,” Hamilton argues this using a few main facts about the type of power the Judiciary is granted by the Constitution. …show more content…
The Executive, points out Hamilton, wields, “the sword of the community,” as well as, “dispenses the honors,” thereof. Further, argues Hamilton, the Legislature, “commands the purse,” as well as, “prescribes the rules by which the duties and rights of every citizen are to be regulated.” Contrary to these aforementioned powers, the Judiciary, states Hamilton, “has no influence over either the sword or the purse,” rather judicial power is passive and defensive. Hamilton goes on to argue that the judiciary, in its limited scope, has, “neither force nor will but merely judgement.” The passive nature of the Judiciary’s power means that it cannot “attack,” either of the two other branches, and that, “all possible care,” must be taken in order to ensure the Judiciary is able to defend itself against impositions by the other two