P.O.G II ESSAY

Philosophy of Government II

The constitution does effectively protect individual liberties because during the iDeal society, the citizen used protesting, use of the court to fight against the ideas they oppose ( the I-chip), president veto bill that violates 4 amendment. My first key point that makes me think the constitution effectively resolve conflict is Congress passing a bill that reinstating Fourth amendment right of privacy. The bill was that the government was not permitted to track your movement without a warrant from a judge. To counter this, the president has the power to veto the bill. That is exactly what our president in our iDeal society did she, reject the bill and refuse to pass it because it broke the fourth amendment. Yet even though the president veto the bill. Congress has the power to check the president decision by overriding the veto, with vote of 2/3 of congress. Located Article 1 Section: 7 in the Constitution. In our iDeal society simulation our congress did override the president veto. This situation shows that the constitution does resolve conflict. Without the constitution the president wouldn’t be able to check congress, from disregarding the rights of the citizens. My second key point is the constitution permitts, the ability to take judicial action, when they felt there rights have been violated, wrongly done or an issue that must be resolve. Located in Article 3 Section 1. In our iDeal society simulation. A citizen ,Malik Copper had died and his family sued Apple feeling that the I-chip was the impact of his death. So begin the Apple vs. Citizen case. In the case on Apple vs. Citizens, the citizen lack evidence, and caught in a more than one lie. All there witness had different stories, as a result Apple came out with victory. To prevent this, the citizen would have to prove without a reasonable doubt that the I-chip was the main cause of death. If the citizens felt that the case was miss trialed and wanted to check the power of the courts they could take the case to a higher court. But then they would have to come with a constitutional question dealing with the case. My last key point is the citizens were able to protest, and start petitions against the I-chip. The constitution First Amendment gives the right of free of speech and press. Without the constitution this right could be taking away and we would be able to do anything about the I-chip. But to counter all the protesting and petitions. The president could pass a bill stating that your not able to do these things. To check the president the citizen can sued for there rights being violated. The constitution does effectively resolve conflict. Without it we wouldn’t be able to protest, congress could pass any bill taking away our rights, and take issues to court. Conflict would build up. Without being able to turn to something and saying no you can’t do that cause it against the law but you can’t do that with no
law ( the constitution). My reason prove the constitution does effectively resolve conflict.