Constitution exam questions

Explain and analyse 3 ways that the US constitution reflects the separation of powers [9 marks]

→ Point 1 : Separation of personnel

• US constitution establishes 3 distinct branches of federal government to mitigate the likelihood of power being concentrated in the hands of one person

• As a result the president and members of cabinet (which belong to the executive branch) cannot also serve simultaneously in congress.

• For example before Obama took office he resigned as senator in 2008 and Jeff sessions also resigned from the senate in order to become attorney general in 2017

• But the principle is partly undermined by the vice president who also acts as the president of the senate and casts tie breaking votes. A power exercised by Kamala Harris on multiple occasions under Bidens administration

→ Point 2 : Federalism

• The US operates under a federalist system of governance in which power is divided between central government and the states

• Constitution outlines powers explicitly retained by federal government such as making treaties and declaring war and state powers that include marriage regulations and education- Giving the states a degree of autonomy and limiting federal overreach

• This separation of powers is consolidated by the tenth amendment that sates powers not delegated to the United Sates by the constitution nor prohibited by it to the states are reserved for the states

→ Point 3 : Checks and balances

• Constitution also outlines checks and balances that can be administered by the separate branches of government to ensure that no branch exceeds its scope of power

• For example the senate must confirm presidential appointments to the administration as well as the judiciary. In 2024 the senate judiciary committee rejected Bidens nomination of Sarah Netburn as a district judge due to a decision she made as a magistrate judge.

• President cannot unilaterally fill positions and senate cannot choose nominees itself reinforcing the distinct division of powers

Explain and analyse three ways that congress can check the president [9marks]

→ Point 1: Override presidential veto

• Presidential vetoes can be overturned by a supermajority in both houses.

• In 2016 congress overturned president Obamas veto of the JASTA that allows victims of terrorism to sue foreign governments in US courts if they are found to have supported acts of terrorism.

• Limits the power of the presidents ability to block legislation that is backed/supported a by high number of representatives and senators.

→ Point 2: Senate confirmations of presidential appointments

• Senate has the exclusive power to reject or accept presidential nominations to the administration and judiciary.

• Nominations can be rejected in the committee stage as was the case for Sarah Netburn - Bidens nomination as a district judge in 2024 or by the full senate which is rare and happened to Robert Bork in 1987 when he was nominated by president Raegan as SC justice but was rejected for his hostility towards civil rights

• Ensures that presidents are unable to appoint individuals that could compromise the integrity/functioning of the judiciary/government

→ Point 3: Impeachment

• The House of representatives can bring charges against government officials including the president via a simple majority

• The senate conducts impeachment trials and is able to remove the president from office if a supermajority is achieved

• Clinton was impeached in 1998 for perjury and obstruction of justice regarding his infidelity but was acquitted by the senate

• Trump is the only president to be impeached twice in 2019 and 2021 but was acquitted both times and later went on to win the 2024 election

• So although Presidents can be charged and removed from office through the process of impeachment which can force them to act within the jurisdiction prescribed to them by the constitution no impeachment trial has yet been successful

Explain and analyse 3 ways that individual rights are protected by the US constitution [9 marks]

→Point 1: Bill of rights

• The bill of rights were 10 consecutive amendments incorporated into the constitution and is arguably the part of constitution that predominantly safeguards individual rights

• Includes right to bear arms and right to freedom of expression/speech which are entrenched

• An amendment to prohibit flag desecration has been a recurring proposal in congress since 1991 but it has never been ratified due to its ability of infringing the first amendment of the constitution

• In 2013 Obama failed to pass a bill expanding background checks to purchase guns as it was deemed to violate the second amendment

• Outlining the difficulty of overturning or limiting the rights entailed in the BOR

→ Point 2 : Role of the supreme court

• Supreme court can uphold individual rights via it power of judicial review(derived for the case of Malbury V madison)

• In Riley V California 2014 the court ruled warrantless search and seizure of the digital contents of a phone during an arrest is unconstitutional under the 4th amendment

• This ruling is significant as it evoked a new understanding of the 4th amendment and was able to uphold individual rights in contemporary society

→ Point 3: Role of pressure groups

• Constitution explicitly protects the freedom to assembly and petition government

• Allowing citizens to protest and lobby the government when they believe their individual rights are endangered.

• Pressure groups such as the ACLU have had an active role in limiting federal overreach that infringes right protections

• At the start of trumps second presidency the ACLU sued the president for his executive order banning birth right Citizenship (upheld by the 14th amendment) leading to a federal judge blocking the order

• Thus pressure groups become a constitutional mechanism for defending individual rights and liberties .

Analyse evaluate and compare the arguments in the extracts over the extent to which it could be argued that the US constitution still works today [25 marks]

→ Introduction

• US constitution is considered the “supreme law of the land”

• And is codified meaning all fundamental rules and principles of how a state should be governed are comprised in 1 written document

• Ratified in 1788 it can be argued that its relevance and operation in contemporary society has been weakened

→ Point 1: Legislative paralysis/unproductivity

• The constitution establishes a bicameral legislature meaning both houses of congress must be in consensus for a bill to be signed into law

• This rigid system combined with increasing partisanship has often lead to legislative gridlock where a divided government cannot effectively pass legislation on critical issues that face the country

• 2013 Democrats controlled senate and presidency whereas the house was under republican control → divided government

• Immigration reform bill that aimed to provide a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants died in the republican controlled house as they refused to consider it

• Demonstrating gridlock inhibiting legislation in key policy areas

• More recently in 2025 the us government faced its longest ever shutdown as it failed to pass the budget for the fiscal year

• For 43 days thousands of workers were furloughed and many made to work without pay

• Constitution provides no mechanism overcome shutdowns or hyper partisanship showing it is not well adapted to modern political challenges.

→ Point 2 : Successfully evolved meeting the changing needs of society

• Can be argued that the constitution still works today due to its ability to adapt to soci despite the lack of formal amendments

• This is a result of the power of judicial review derived by supreme court from Malbury v madison which allows the court to interpretate provisions of the constitution in contemporary contexts

• Landmark cases like Obergefell V Hodges in 2015 - in which sc rules the right to marry is a fundamental liberty protected by the due process clause and denying this right to same sex couples violated the 14 th amendment

• Reinterpretation of existing parts of the constitution sets new legal precedent showing the ability of the constitution to evolve and safeguard rights without being restricted by the amendment process

• However it can be argued that the amendment process does act as barrier to necessitated change as the ERA amendment that would give constitutional protection to the rights of women has been failed to be ratified. So constitution has only partially been able to adapt

→ Point 3 : Successful in limiting federal overreach and protecting state rights

• Under the 10th amendment any power that is not assigned to federal government nor prohibited to by the sates rests with the sates.-Protecting the autonomy and individuality of sates enabling them to govern without federal influence

• This is seen clearly in the policy divergence between sates in areas such as drug use where recreational use of cannabis is legal in California but illegal in Texas

• SC rulings such as overturning of roe v wade in Dobbs v Jackson returned authority over abortion regulations to individual states allowing each state to set its own laws ranging from full bans to full protections

• However recently it can be argued that the jurisdiction of federal government has increased with trump administration attempting to enforce the removal of undocumented illegal migrants using agencies such as ICE against the wishes of democratic states

• But the sanctuary city movement is a local policy choice where some states refuse to cooperate with ICE through not sharing information with the federal agency

• reflecting the anti-comandeering doctrine where states can not be forced to enforce federal law

The US and UK legislatures effectively check the executive. Analyse and evaluate this statement [25marks]

→ Introduction:

• The legislative branch of the USA is congress and parliament for the UK both are bicameral and have the primary function of passing legislation.

• It can be argued that the although both legislature have considerable scope to check the the executive, the USA is much more effective due to its formal separation of power.

→ Point 1 : Both legislatures can refuse to pass bills proposed by the government

• This is much more likely in the USA where there is often divided government and high levels of partisanship that can restrict the executives legislative agenda.

• E.g In 2013 Obamas immigration reform bill was effectively killed in the republican controlled house of representatives who refused to bring it to the floor → which quenched Obamas intended overhaul of the US immigration system

• Refusal to pass legislation acts as check on executive power if there is strong opposition against it

• In the UK it is far less likely as the fusion of powers mean that the executive normally controls the legislative (particularly the HOC) through either commanding a majority or supply and confidence agreements as was the case for Mays arrangement with the DUP in 2017

• Backbench rebellion often acts a check on the executive legislative agenda where MPs of the majority party vote against the government

• E.g In 2004 72 labour MPs rebelled against Blair’s higher education bill that raised tuition fees, one of the largest rebellions faced by a post war labour government despite having a majority. Despite the magnitude of the rebellion the bill passed 316-311. Blair still had to offer concessions and enforce whipping pressure.→ Politically damaging for the PM but not fatal

→ Point 2: Role of committees

• In the USA house and senate committee chairs regulate the agenda and can significantly mark up or gatekeep bills

• Standing committees have the power to limit or block executive backed bills in committee

• E.g Obamas cap and trade bill 2009 → passed the house but was blocked in the senate environment and public works committee where republicans did not report it out of the committee, which blocked Obamas climate agenda for the rest of his presidency

• In UK public committees scrutinise and can suggest amendments to government bills- a way to criticise executive policy, but as the government always has a majority on the committee, major changes to the bill are less likely to happen at this stage and can be reversed later on

• However select committees can check that government is performing adequately and launch investigations into the executive and publish reports

• E.g Home affairs select committee investigation into the Windrush scandal 2018-2020 that led to the resignation off the home secretary Amber Rudd. → Demonstrating a clear check on the executive and accountability.

→ Point 3: Removal of the President and PM

• Removal of the head of government can be argued to be the most drastic check on the power of the executive

• In the USA this power is exercised via impeachment- house brings charges against an official and the senate carries out the trial.

• Richard Nixon resigned days before a full house vote regarding his impeachment .Demonstrates how scandal and imminent removal from office can erode a presidents credibility and result in an eventual loss of party support.

• However Donald trump was impeached twice in his first presidency for abuse of power and then with incitement of insurrection

• But he was acquitted twice and went on to win the 2024 presidency.→ Impeachment thus becomes less effective as a check on the executive if it is seen as a partisan strike

• In the UK no confidence motions can be called by the opposition or the government itslef to see whether the executive still commands the support of the majority. If a majority votes for the motion the PM is expected to resign or call a general election. However a motion of no confidence has not been successful since 1979.

• And instead internal leadership challenges can be much more damaging and a stern check on the executive as was the case for thatcher in 1990 where Hesseltine challenged thatcher and senior misters like Geoffrey Howe publicly criticised her-leading to her resignation.