The Constitution specifically indictes that Congress is the legislative body of the government and, as such, is the only body that can create laws. The Courts, however, have the power of ensuring Congress acts within the law and that its laws are constitutiona. Therefore, the Courts have the power and duty to correct Congressional actions when they violate the law. However, Congress, due to the express and implied powers provided in the Constitution, has the ability to delegate specific authority for the efficient management of laws and programs. This is why it delegates power to the federal administrative agencies. Further, given the fact that the leaders of these agencies have the specific knowledge necessary to write the regulations that enforce the broaders laws Congress writes. If Congress failed to do this it would need to hire aviation experts (for the FAA's job), scientists (for the FDA's job), and so on. This would lead to a massive Congressional body and be less efficient to operate. In the current system each agency focuses on only one single area and body of laws, making its work more direct, better informed, and more effective. The courts do not defer too much to Congress in this area for, under the Constitution, it is Congress's sole judgment as to what to defer and how to defer. For the court's to deny Congress this power would be, as many claim, for the court to "write law" and unconstitutional action on the court's part. Alternatives to these agencies are difficult to think of. The only other alternative would be a massive number of Congressional offices with each senator and member of house responsible for a specific area of law, similar to the committees they have now, which serve to write the laws, write the regulations needed to enforce the laws, and a reporting agency to investifgate and prosecute violations of the laws. For example, this is the way Congress handles issues of treason - directly. This process would stop the regular work of Congress and, if Congress had to do this for all federal laws it writes, it would soon be unable to do anything but enforce, investigate, and prosecute violations of its laws. Indeed, the Ken Starr report investigation took nearly a year to complete, as an example.
For Jane -
Can you help me with another problem? I notice that you have already answered it for someone else but the file is unavailable at mediafire. I am willing to pay extra for it.
The question is as follows:
Rebecca Businesswoman had been searching for a job since graduation. She interviewed with a large firm, and they made her an offer for employment starting at an annual salary of $50,000. Taking the job meant that Rebecca would have to move a considerable distance, leaving her friends and family behind. Before accepting, Rebecca asked for reassurances that the firm would keep her for at least two years, making it worth her while to move. During the phone call, the firm did tell her that she was highly qualified and they would love her in their employ for at least two years if not more! Rebecca, as diligent as she is, wrote the following letter:
Dear Big Firm:
Thank you for your time and interest in my professional pursuits. Although it will be hard leaving my friends and family and moving to a new city, I am looking forward to working with you. I have decided to accept your offer for $50,000.00 per year commencing on May 1, 2007. I understand per our conversation that my employment will at least be for a two-year period.
Although things went well for eight months at the new firm, Rebecca was terminated on January 1, 2008. Rebecca sued for wrongful termination and breach of employment contract. Big Firm has asserted the Statute of Frauds as a defense. Does Rebecca have a viable suit for breach of contract? Does the Statute of Frauds apply to any purported contract? Was there a contract created between Rebecca and Big Firm?
Prepare an interoffice memorandum to your supervising attorney that answers the following questions:
Be sure to support your analysis with cites to applicable case law and other scholarly legal authority.
I am sorry, but I cannot provide that answer on this question.