What role do judges and the judicial system play in supporting freedom?

Freedom is not the only thing that we look to our judicial system to help with. For years studies have been done to find out if children's vaccines have strong side affects to certain types of children. Scientific studies have proven that some children not all are affected adversly to vaccines. Vaccines such as DTAP (Diptheria, Tetnus, and Pertusis), MMR (Measles, Mumps, and Rubella), and even Varicella (Chicken Pox) have been linked to affects such as seizures, autism, and other disabilities.

So freedom is not the only thing that we look to the government and the judicial system for. We also look for protection. The Supreme Court ruled on February 22, 2011 that families whose children have suffered some adverse affect from a childhood vaccine cannot seek retribution from the pharmaceutical companies.  According to an article published by CBS News on February 23, 2011, "the court voted 6-2 against parents of a child who sued the drug maker Wyeth in the Pennsylvania state court, for diabilitating seizures their daugter has suffered for 19 years caused by the DTAP vaccine."  (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20034998-504083.html).

According to another article published by Homeland Security Newswire, on March 15, 2011 the ruling is prohibiting parents to seek strickter guidelines on the production of vaccines. As it stands now in the 1986 Childhood Vaccine Act, the Food and Drug Administration sets the guidelines for drug manufacturers. The guidelines are not strict enough. The law that was passed in 1986 by congress provided the Drug companies protection from parents legal cases.

We need our court systems to help us not throw our concerns out the window.

How does the U S Congress as it exists and in its current structure support and or limit authentic representation

I do not believe that congress can represent the people authentically. Why may you ask? In our current society there is prejudice, racism, gender inequality, class inequality, and minority groups who are not properly represented. 

The Senate and the House of Representatives was originally created to represent the citizens from all walks of life equally and without prejudice. Minorities, women, men, and all manners of classes are supposed to have equal representation. According to an article that I found posted on March 9, 2011 from CBS News, "sixty percent of Senate freshman and more than 40 percent of House freshman are millionaires. This was reported by an analysis done by the Center for Responsive Politics."(http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20041350-503544.html)

With knowing this simple fact how is our congress authentically representing the people? According to The Politics of Power on page 182, "blacks comprise 12 percent of the electorate occupying 7 percent of the seats in the house and one percent of all senate seats. Women make up 52 percent of all eligible voters and they make up 14 percent of the seats in the house and held about 16 percent of the seats in the senate. Hispanics are 8 percent of the electorate occupying 3 percent of the seats in the house and 2 percent of all senate seats."

With these two stimulating facts authentic representation is extremely far fetched. The rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. Classes will stay having an enormous range of inequality. As of this minute the working class has never been represented.

In what ways does the US Presidency support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy

 First what is a democracy? According to the Webster's Dictionary definition of a democracy is a government sponsored by the people, where the majority rule and the highest office is usually run through representatives of the people.

Okay, knowing that, what is the definition of a republic? The answer to this question is according to the Webster's Dictionary is that it is a government that has an executive which is not a monarch and is usually called a president and where citizens have the right to vote.

I have another one for you, what about capitalism or perhaps even socialism? Capitalism is where land and wealth are with the people. Socialism is a government in which the people own and control the economic systems. 

Knowing these definitions we can now try to answer our first question; does the US presidency support or limit the formation of a democracy. Well, the United States is actually a combination of a democracy, a republic, capitalistic, and socialistic. With this the president does both support and limit the formation of an ideal democracy. The president of the United States is the only representative that is voted upon by all of the citizens of the nation. However, with that said depending upon how the the Congress is split, meaning if the majority of the congress is democratic as it was before our mid-term elections back in November of 2010, the president has more chances in getting his specific agendas because President Obama was in specific terms the head of the Democratic Party. As our Congress stands now it provides more checks and balances to prevent such overuse of power.

The president of the United States is supposed to listen to his/her constituents and help provide protection, equality, and the rights given by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.