4 ms·
> This isn't a new issue either. Actually, it's one of the fundamental checks and balances. The judiciary has no executive power. The reason a conviction in co
by saraid216 13y ago
> This isn't a new issue either.
Actually, it's one of the fundamental checks and balances. The judiciary has no executive power. The reason a conviction in court sucks for the defendant is because the executive branch actors enforce that conviction by taking the convict to jail.
- javajosh 13y agoUltimate authority rests with the executive because they have the guns.
- saraid216 13y agoThe executive has the guns because that's how it was designed.
- dredmorbius 13y agoHowever the legislative branch pays for those guns (and the men who hold them, the ammunition that goes in them, the vehicles which transport them, and the fuel which powers those). It's called checks and balances for a reason. There is no center of power, though the balance may shift over time (and yes, the executive has a great deal of power).