1 / 50

Separation of Powers: The Three Branches of Government A Justice Teaching Case Study

Separation of Powers: The Three Branches of Government A Justice Teaching Case Study. TM. Bush v. Schiavo , 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004): A discussion of the separation of powers under the Florida Constitution. TM. What are the three branches of government in Florida?. The Executive Branch.

joelt
Download Presentation

Separation of Powers: The Three Branches of Government A Justice Teaching Case Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Separation of Powers:The Three Branches of GovernmentA Justice Teaching Case Study TM

  2. Bush v. Schiavo, 885 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2004): A discussion of the separation of powers under the Florida Constitution TM

  3. What are the three branches of government in Florida?

  4. The Executive Branch TM

  5. The Legislative Branch TM

  6. The Judicial Branch TM

  7. Where are these branches listed? The Florida Constitution TM

  8. The Constitution delineates the powers of each branch of government. TM

  9. The Three Branches of Government • The Legislative Branch creates the laws TM

  10. The Three Branches of Government • The Judicial Branch interprets the laws TM

  11. The Three Branches of Government • The Executive Branch executes the laws TM

  12. The Three Branches of Government • Who else is part of the executive branch? Law Enforcement Executive Agencies TM

  13. There are also three branches of federal government listed in the United States Constitution.

  14. The Legislative Branch • The Legislative Branch creates the laws TM

  15. The Judicial Branch • The Judicial Branch interprets the laws TM

  16. The Executive Branch • The Executive Branch executes the laws TM

  17. The Executive Branch • Who else is part of the executive branch? Federal Law Enforcement Executive Agencies TM

  18. Can one branch of government perform the duties of another branch? ANSWER: NO Why not? TM

  19. The Florida Constitution provides: • Branches of government.—The powers of the state government shall be divided into legislative, executive and judicial branches. No person belonging to one branch shall exercise any powers appertaining to either of the other branches unless expressly provided herein. TM

  20. This provision is known as the “separation of powers” clause. Does the United States Constitution have an express separation of powers clause? TM

  21. Answer: No However, the United States Constitution is structured so that no one branch of government is vested with all of the power. Each branch is limited (or checked) by the other branches. Thus, federal government operates as a system of checks and balances. TM

  22. Checks on the Legislature • The President can veto a law passed by Congress • The Supreme Court can strike a law passed by Congress as unconstitutional TM

  23. Checks on the Executive • Congress can impeach the President • The Supreme Court defines the limits of the President’s power TM

  24. Checks on the Judiciary • The President appoints members of the Supreme Court… • With the advice and consent of the Senate TM

  25. How can we find out what the separation of powers clause in the Florida Constitution means? TM

  26. The Separation of Powers • It is the duty of the judiciary to interpret the law. • The Florida Constitution is a body of law. • We look to judicial decisions to determine what the separation of powers clause means. TM

  27. The Separation of Powers • The clause covers two specific prohibitions: • No branch may encroach upon (invade) the powers of another. • No branch may delegate (assign) to another branch its constitutional powers. Chiles v. Children A, B, C, D, E, and F, 589 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1991) TM

  28. The Separation of Powers • If the conduct by one branch falls under either prohibition, that conduct is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers clause in the Florida Constitution. TM

  29. Why is a Separation of Powers Necessary? • According to the Florida Supreme Court, the drafters of the Florida Constitution “had witnessed the breaking down by unrestrained legislation all the security of property derived from contract . . . the overturning of solemn decisions of the Courts of the last resort, by, under the pretence of remedial acts, enacting for one or the other party litigants such provisions as would dictate to the judiciary their decision… TM

  30. Why is a Separation of Powers Necessary? • . . . .and leaving everything which should be expounded by the judiciary to the variable and ever-changing mind of the popular branch of the Government.” Trustees Internal Improvement Fund v. Bailey, 10 Fla. 238 (1863) TM

  31. Today, you will be a justice on the Florida Supreme Court and decide a real case involving the separation of powers clause. TM

  32. But first – You should examine cases to decide how the Florida judiciary has analyzed the separation of powers clause in prior situations. TM

  33. Chiles v. Children A, B, C, D, E, and F, 589 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1991) • The Legislature passed a law that permitted the Governor to reduce state agency budgets to prevent a budget deficit. When a revenue shortfall occurred, the Governor reduced the budgets of various state agencies. • The Florida Supreme Court held that the statute violated the separation of powers because only the Legislature may allocate (distribute), or reduce the allocation of, state funds. TM

  34. Chiles v. Children A, B, C, D, E, and F, 589 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1991) • The Court concluded that it is the responsibility of the Legislature to establish the priorities of the State of Florida through the allocation of funds. When the power to change those priorities is given to another branch of government (here, the executive branch) without any guidelines to implement Legislative intent, the duty of the Legislature to establish priorities is improperly nullified. TM

  35. B.H. v. State, 645 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 1998) • A statute made it a crime to escape from a juvenile commitment facility that is of “restrictiveness level VI or above.” The statute provided that the different restrictiveness levels would be established by the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), an executive branch agency. • The Florida Supreme Court held that the statute violated the separation of powers clause because the authority to determine what the law is, and to define the elements of a crime, belongs exclusively to the Legislature. TM

  36. B.H. v. State, 645 So. 2d 987 (Fla. 1998) • Here, the Legislature unconstitutionally delegated the power to define a crime to an executive agency by allowing HRS unlimited discretion to define the various levels of restrictiveness with regard to juvenile commitment facilities. TM

  37. State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000) • The Prison ReleaseeReoffender Punishment Act authorized the enhanced sentencing of criminal defendants who qualify as reoffenders. The Act gave prosecutors the authority to decide whether to seek sentencing under the Act. • A criminal defendant contended that the Act violated the separation of powers clause because it improperly granted prosecutors (members of the executive branch) discretion in sentencing and allegedly encroached on the power of the judiciary to sentence defendants. TM

  38. State v. Cotton, 769 So. 2d 345 (Fla. 2000) • The Florida Supreme Court held that the Act was constitutional because the Legislature can give prosecutors the discretion whether to pursue—or not pursue—the enhanced penalties in the Act, and the exercise of such discretion by prosecutors is generally not subject to review by the judiciary. • The Court also noted that the Act only imposes a mandatory minimum sentence. If the defendant is eligible for a harsher sentence under the law, courts still have the discretion to impose the harsher sentence. Thus, the Act did not encroach on the sentencing power of the judiciary. TM

  39. Marine Industries Assoc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envir. Protection, 672 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) • Under the Florida Manatee Sanctuary Act, the Legislature designated specific geographic areas and authorized the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to regulate the construction and expansion of marine facilities and the operation of motorboats in those areas. • The Marine Industries Association contended that the statute allowing for DEP regulation in one of those areas was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the executive branch. TM

  40. Marine Industries Assoc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envir. Protection, 672 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) • The Fourth District Court of Appeal held that no separation of powers violation occurred. The district court explained that although minimum standards must be established by the Legislature to guide an administrative agency in implementing legislative intent, “if the subject matter requires the expertise and flexibility of the agency to deal with complex and fluid conditions, the legislature will not be required to draft more detailed or specific legislation.” TM

  41. Marine Industries Assoc. v. Fla. Dep’t of Envir. Protection, 672 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) • The district court then noted that DEP had been “charged with enacting rules to protect a migratory endangered species which inhabits waters also used by the public. By the very nature of the problem and the mobility of the manatee, articulating exact standards would be difficult at best and probably subject to change on a yearly basis as the manatees' habitat changes.” TM

  42. Bush v. Schiavo • Now for the case that you will decide. • Read the case materials provided and circle or highlight all important facts. TM

  43. Florida’s Court Structure Supreme Court 7 Judges District Courts of Appeal 62 Judges Circuit Courts 599 Judges County Courts 322 Judges TM

  44. Bush v. Schiavo • What are the facts of the case? • How did the trial court rule? • How did the district court of appeal rule? • How are the facts similar to Chiles, B.H., Cotton, and Marine Industries Association? • How are they different? TM

  45. Bush v. Schiavo • The Question Presented: Does “Terri’s Law” violate the separation of powers clause of the Florida Constitution? TM

  46. Supreme Court Conference • Individually answer the question. • If you vote yes, you are ruling in favor of Michael Schiavo. • If you vote no, you are ruling in favor of Governor Bush. • Give reasons for the group decision and explain how the decision is supported by the cases previously discussed. TM

  47. How did the Florida Supreme Court Actually Rule? TM

  48. Bush v. Schiavo • By a unanimous vote, the Court held that “Terri’s Law” violated the separation of powers clause of the Florida Constitution. TM

  49. Bush v. Schiavo • The Court held that Terri’s law gave the Governor the power to reverse a final judgment that had properly been entered by a trial court. By authorizing the Governor to do so, “Terri’s Law” constituted an unconstitutional encroachment on the power granted to the judiciary under the Florida Constitution. TM

  50. Bush v. Schiavo • The Court also held that “Terri’s Law” improperly delegated legislative power to the Governor. The Court noted that the Legislature failed to provide any standards by which the Governor should determine when to issue a stay, or how long a stay should remain in effect. The law also gave the Governor absolute discretion to determine when to lift a stay. TM

More Related