Out of all 3 branches which branch of government is least and the most dangerous, state your opinon

Question

Out of all 3 branches which branch of government is least and the most dangerous, state your opinon

Answer 1

The courts are the most dangerous they keep making laws when they are not suppose to.  The President is probably the least dangerous.

Answer 2

The executive is the most dangerous, because the balance of powers has failed.  The first time the balance of power failed was in 1961 when the CIA lied to the President in order to invade Cuba and nobody objected to the invasion.  Earlier invasions such as Guatamala and Malaysia were secret.

The Supreme Court is the least dangerous, even though Supreme Court decisions are the most likely to have an affect on my personal life.  By this I am referring to decisions such as Roe v Wade, Anti-Discrimination, Miranda etc. which have a great deal of effect for every citizen.

Answer 3

Robin Hood and Maid Marion with Friar Tuck and his Merry men.

Paddling the row boat.

Even throw out some of the paddlers too.

Until everyone on board.

Sink and swim together.

While sinking .

Calling the paddlers to help out.

When the paddlers were soaking bobbing up and down the water.

Luke 6.39-40,41-45,46-49

What do you think?

Answer 4

I will say least - judicial. Because if in working form, congress and pres will handle the laws properly, and not even require the supreme court. That is, if we followed the constitution.

Most dangerous - legislative. They promote unconstitutional measures... All of them. And when there is nobody to argue with (since they agree on the real issues 99%), they have their way, with the citizens realizing very little. Who has the power to increase the size, and cost of government? With that, comes increased power of government. With that comes a weakened "supreme court".

*Just a quick opinion.

Answer 5

There's two sets of answers, depending on whether you consider the branches as they are supposed to work, according to the Constitution, or as they do work today, according to the wills of some people who are presently in them.

Jefferson considered the legislative branch as the most dangerous, which is why he and the rest of them put the 10th Amendment in there. To quote him:

"I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground: That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States or to the people." To take a single step beyond the boundaries thus specifically drawn around the powers of Congress is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition." -- Thomas Jefferson: Opinion on National Bank, 1791

However, he had not yet seen the sideshows that the executive branch has employed over the decades using "Executive Orders", and in particular during the last 8 years by use of the so-called "Presidential Signing Statement." Largely used in previous administrations as a ceremonial comment, or to raise questions about the constitutionality of a particular part of a signed bill, the current president has used signing statements to exempt himself from signed legislation. In effect, he signs a bill but makes a margin note that says, "Oh by the way, I do not have to obey this part, and this part here."

The Constitution is quite clear. If a president does not agree with a bill, s/he is supposed to send it back to Congress for editing, and barring a satisfactory compromise, Congress can override the veto. But this president signs a bill into law that he does not agree with, and then simply ignores the parts that he doesn't want to obey.

Misappropriation of power from one branch by one of the others ruins utterly the check and balance on which the Constitution, and our very republic, is based. The most dangerous branch currently is without a doubt the executive. An executive with no constraints is nothing less than a monarch, whom neither court nor legislator can touch.