The informal amendment process in contemporary politics encompasses a host of dynamics that contribute to shaping the law of the land. These changes mainly come about via two broad methods: judicial interpretation and political practice. Whereas judicial interpretation refers to the way the judiciary interprets the provisions of the constitution, political practice highlights how the legislature works to bring about change outside of formal channels. These two dynamics are the focus of this essay.
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the land and is responsible for interpreting the provisions of the constitution. This interpretation is crucial because it gives meaning to constitutional provisions. Interpreting the constitution is not always straightforward. The Constitution is an old document that was written over 200 years ago. As a result, some of its provisions are open to interpretation. These open provisions have given the Supreme Court ample room to interpret the Constitution as they see fit.
However, not everyone agrees with the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution. For instance, some people feel that the Supreme Court has overstepped its mandate in certain instances. Others feel that the Supreme Court has failed to interpret the Constitution in a manner that is in line with what the drafters of the Constitution had in mind.
Outside of judicial interpretation, the informal amendment process in contemporary politics is driven by political practice. Political practice refers to the way politicians and political parties work to bring about change without amending the Constitution formally. Politicians use a variety of ways to shape the law of the land. These include passing legislation, exercising executive power, and even engaging in informal negotiations with interest groups.
One example of political practice in action is the way the U.S. government has used executive orders to bring about change without amending the Constitution formally. For example, President Barack Obama issued an executive order allowing undocumented immigrants to remain in the country temporarily without fear of deportation. Similarly, President Trump issued a travel ban prohibiting individuals from certain countries from entering the United States. The travel ban was met with widespread criticism and was ultimately struck down by the Supreme Court.
In conclusion, the informal amendment process in contemporary politics encompasses a variety of dynamics, including judicial interpretation and political practice. Judicial interpretation is crucial because it gives meaning to constitutional provisions. Political practice is equally important because it allows politicians to bring about change without amending the Constitution formally. While both of these dynamics are necessary for shaping the law of the land, they are not always in sync. As a result, the informal amendment process can be a rocky road filled with disagreements and challenges.
(Note: Do you have knowledge or insights to share? Unlock new opportunities and expand your reach by joining our authors team. Click Registration to join us and share your expertise with our readers.)
Speech tips:
Please note that any statements involving politics will not be approved.