1. Separation of Powers & Checks and Balances
“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed, and in the next place oblige it to control itself”
James Madison, Federalist #51

2.  2/3 Required for Override
 Veto Power
Executive
 Appoints Judges
 2/3 Required for Override
 Rely on Executive branch to enforce decisions
 Treaties and Appointments
 Commander in Chief
 Removal requires 2/3 vote
 Make the Law (51%)
 Override a Veto
Approve Treaties (2/3) & Confirms Nominees (Senate Only)
 Appointed for Life
 Judicial Review
 Declares war
Legislative
Can Impeach & Remove from Office (Impeach = SM / Trial = 2/3)
Checks & Balances
Checks & Balances is perhaps the single most important feature of the U.S. constitutional system. It gives each branch of government the power to put the others in check. The affect is limit the power of the federal government generally.
Another way to look at checks & balances is to realize that no one branch of government can fully exercise a particular power by itself. The best example of this is the lawmaking power of the legislative branch. Congress can make law, but the President must sign the bill before it becomes law (unless, of course, Congress overrides the veto).
To see how each element of checks and balances works, be sure to “play” this slide
Judicial
 Appointed for Life
 Judicial Review
Approves Judicial Nominees (Senate only)

3. Examples of Appointments
(Upper Left) Bush nominated Samuel Alito to the U.S. Supreme Court in 2006 to fill the vacancy left by Sandra Day O’Connor. After a political fight between Democrats and Republicans, Alito was finally confirmed by the Senate
(Upper Right) Obama nominates Sonya Sotomayor, the first Latino women on the Court
(Lower left and right) Obama nominates the first African American as the US Attorney General. Hillary Clinton is nominated as Secretary of State

4. JUDICIAL REVIEW
What are the limitations on the Court’s power of judicial review?
no power to enforce
appellate jurisdiction
Judicial Review – Limitations
Two limitations of the Court’s power of Judicial review: One, the Court has no enforcement powers. They must rely on the Executive branch to enforce their decisions. Historically, presidents have not always been willing to enforce the Court’s decision.
A good example the Court’s lack of enforcement power, is Andrew Jackson’s refusal to abide by the Court’s decision that removing Native American tribes from Florida and Georgia was unconstitutional. The Indians were removed during a forced march known as the trail of tears. In contrast, President Eisenhower enforced the Court’s decision in the 1954 Brown case which declared segregation unconstitutional. Eisenhower ordered active duty military forces from the 101st airborne division to protect 9 black students (known as the Little Rock Nine) who attended Central High School in Little Rock Arkansas.
Another limitation comes from the fact that the vast majority of court cases come to the Court on appeal (appellate). The Court must “wait” for the case to be challenged. If the law is never challenged, or if the losers in the lower courts do not appeal, then the Supreme Court has not the power to rule on the case.

5. Case studies Checks & Balances
Case studies are a good way to see how more abstract principles apply in the real world. The following are case studies that will give you a deeper understanding of Checks and Balances.
Case studies

6. WAR POWERS
Can a President take military action without a declaration of war from Congress?
War Powers
Presidents have often taken the country to war with an official declaration of war from Congress (at least a 100 x’s in our history). Congress is supposed to declare, then the President acts as commander in chief. Korea, Vietnam, The Gulf War, and the War in Iraq were not officially declared wars.
Vietnam set the stage for a battle between Congress and the President Nixon. The War Powers Resolution was passed as a result.

7. WAR POWERS War Powers Act (1973) RESOURCES
Obama’s War Illegal (SL Tribune)
War Powers Act (1973)
Military Action? Must Inform Congress within 48 hours
Unless Congress gives an official declaration of war or specifically authorizes the president to take action, the president must …
Stop Fighting in 60 days / pull troops out in 90 days
Authorization for the use of military force (Sept. 18, 2001)
Libya, 2011 … AUMF 2015
War Powers
By 1973 Congress felt that presidents had gone too far in sending troops to battle without a declaration of war. Congress felt like it was time to “reign in” the presidency. The result was the War Powers Act (or Resolution) of Specifically, the act came in response to the Vietnam war. (See the slide for details of the law).
Resource:
See the resolution allowing Bush to invade Afghanistan after

8. IMPEACHMENT PROCESS Impeachment House Simple Majority Trial Senate
IN DEPTH
The Impeachment Process (House.gov)
Impeachment
House
Simple Majority
Trial
Senate
Removal = 2/3rds vote
Impeachment Process
One of the more potent tools of the legislative branch to check the executive branch is to impeach and remove a president from office. This process is rare but a few presidents have faced serious impeachment proceedings. The Impeachment Process has two parts: Impeachment (Which means to accuse) and Removal from office (A trial is conducted). The Framers divided the process between the two houses of Congress with the House conducting the impeachment and the Senate putting the president on trial. The Framers did not want impeach to be used as a political weapon. Of course it can be used as a political weapon, but the Framers made it unlikely by requiring a 2/3rds vote for the process (Both steps require a 2/3rds vote)
Why did the Framers make impeachment of a president difficult?
Unlikely to use as a political weapon

9. IMPEACHMENT Presidents: Impeached……… Removed Johnson (1868)
Nixon (1973)
Clinton (1999)
Bush, 2007 x
Escaped removal by 1 vote
x x
Resigned
Impeached for perjury
Articles of impeachment were introduced into the House but did not go very far
Impeachment Process
Three presidents have faced a serious attempt at impeachment. Two presidents have been impeached (Johnson and Clinton), but no president has been convicted. Nixon would almost certainly have been impeached and likely convicted in a trial but resigned before impeachment proceedings could move forward. He became the first president in US history to resign from office. Articles of impeach were introduced into the House against George W. Bush for War in Iraq (specifically on the issue of WMD’s) but they did not get very far.

10. Upon what grounds can a President be impeached?
Impeachment Criteria
Upon what grounds can a President be impeached?
Article II, Section 4
Treason
Bribery
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
Perjury
Impeachment Process
Read Section 4 of Article II for the criteria under which a president can be impeached. Presidents can face impeachment for treason, bribery, and high crimes. Treason is selling out your country, bribery is taking money for political favors, and high crimes?? Actually, it is not clear what a “high crime” is. Its likely the Framers inserted the high crimes clause to give the process some flexibility. In other words, congress can decide what a high crime is. Traditional, any serious crime can be considered a high crime. This includes perjury, which is lying under oath. One of the articles of impeachment brought against Bill Clinton in 1998 cited his act of perjury. Clinton had lied about having sexual relations with Monica Lewinski. No presidents have been formally accused of Treason or Bribery.