Constitutional Principles: Separation of Powers

Here from government class

This short video was very informative. Thanks for putting this on YouTube.

Here from Business Law class ! Professor Sheila Fogitta

This works in theory and in practice it works pretty well but there are some flaws that we are encountering now. When politicians run for Congress, their election is very dependent upon their campaign. Campaigning for a political office is like advertising. The more people know about a product or see ads everywhere, then the more likely they are to buy it. Likewise, if politicians have a large, widespread campaign the more likely they are to get elected (within reason). But campaigning requires money. Large companies figured out that they could fund campaigns for politicians, then once those politicians are in power, they would help pass laws that benefitted those companies. Political unions also began to pop up where people give money to unions that hold ideas they support and those unions fund political campaigns too. However, wealthier people can pour more money into unions and thus making the politicians that they support more likely to get into office. So essentially what happens is that the wealth are represented more than the poor which isn't how a democracy should work. Here's a video that really does a good job of explaining this corruption: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig

Good stuff...

here from Civics class

except the Environmental Protection Agency... it's part of the executive and has its law enforcement, but passes its own "laws" by calling them "regulations" and then has its own courts in which the accused does not have appeal to courts under the judicial branch.

But it also means that there is no-one to credit and no-one to blame when things go right or wrong. And it also allows for the government to shutdown.

why there are so many teacher like to use this video???????

So what are the options when individuals are confronted by an entity that knowingly is crossing those bounds. BATF for example, fall under the executive branch but think and act like they have the authority of the legislative and even judicial. They know they would lose in a court of law, but they don't care as their goals are immediate results. If reversed, it would be like a bnak robber saying he has a right to rob the bank and the police are unable to stop him because he says he has that authority. Forcing the police to take him to court months down the road, and when the court orders him to pay back the money, he indicates he can't find it. Nothing is reasonable about this.  So what are the REASONABLE legal options for an individual when facing that situation?

How can government endanger the rights of the people, when the people vote for the government?

misspelled "judicial" at 1:13

who's watching this in 2018?

But the majority IS the public. They are one and the same.

here from 7th grade

bruh what are thes comments

gay.

No! The judiciary's role is to apply the law, not interpret it. To say that their job is to interpret the law is to give them the power to rewrite it. If their job is to interpret the law, who is anyone else to say that they misinterpreted it? The judiciary is supposed to apply the law.

i hate learning 😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡😡

You will get more respect of you spell entitled correctly. If you can't spell, leave the hard work to us intelligent people.