...between the Court's understanding of inherent judicial power and Hamilton's observation in Federalist 78: [T]he judiciary, from the nature of its functions,...least in a capacity to annoy or injure them. . . . The judiciary . . . has no influence over either the sword or the purse, no direction either of the strength...

...rare. There is rather universal truth to Hamilton's observation that among the branches of government, "the judiciary, from the nature of its functions,...it will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them."48 Disputes over the "proper" role of the courts are particularly likely to arise in democracies...

...federal judges: Whoever attentively considers the different departments of power must perceive that, in a government in which they are separated from each...dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution. . . . [The judiciary] has no influence over either the sword or the purse. ... It may truly be said...

...fulfilling the aims of the Constitution. Hamilton viewed the judiciary as the branch of government "least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution;...will be least in a capacity to annoy or injure them." Whereas the executive branch holds the power of war and the legislative branch holds the power of the...

...the Congress or President that violate the Constitution or the law. Although Hamilton predicted that "the judiciary, from the nature of its functions,...dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution," he also understood that judicial review was an indispensable power necessary to maintain the integrity...

...must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. (Federalist 78, par. 11) In Hamilton's view, "[T]he judiciary, from the nature of its functions,...dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution. . . ." (Federalist 78, par. 6). The judiciary controls neither "the sword" nor "the putse" of the community;...