Final answer:
Cesare Beccaria argued for limiting judicial power to prevent bias and corruption. The U.S. Founding Fathers designed a checks and balances system to maintain judicial impartiality and prevent any branch from becoming too powerful. This concept is still relevant as debates about the Supreme Court's authority continue to arise.
Step-by-step explanation:
Cesare Beccaria believed that the power of judges should be limited to avoid the biases and corruption that could arise from having a single body act as both advocates and judges at the same time. Beccaria's concerns about judicial power are reflected in the sentiments of many of the Founding Fathers. For example, in Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued that the judiciary should be the least dangerous branch since it had neither force nor will but merely judgment, and that its role was to protect people from unjust laws.
The concern is that if judges also had influence over the legislative or executive powers, or if they were not checked by these branches, they might overstep their bounds, leading to an imbalance in the separation of powers that is essential for a functioning democracy. The U.S. Constitution's checks and balances system was designed to prevent any one branch from gaining too much power, thus preserving liberty and ensuring justice.
Contemporary discussions continue to debate the extent of judicial power. Questions are raised about whether judges, who in the federal system are unelected and serve for life, should have the ability to significantly influence law and policy. The Supreme Court's decisions, such as limiting the imposition of the death penalty or requiring drug testing for high school students, exemplify the significant role the judiciary plays within government, law, and society.