What are 3 examples of checks and balance?

“Checks and balances” refers to the separation of powers that results from divided branches of government outlined in the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution divides power among the three branches of government — executive, legislative, and judicial — to prevent any one from having too much power.

Each branch is said to have the ability to check the power of the others, thereby maintaining a balance in the government.

Though it’s sometimes said the United States has three “equal” branches of government, in reality the power of each has fluctuated throughout history.

Examples of checks and balances include:

The president (Executive) is commander in chief of the military, but Congress (Legislative) approves military funds.
The president (Executive) nominates federal officials, but the Senate (Legislative) confirms those nominations.
Both the House and the Senate have to pass a bill in the same form for it to become law.
Once Congress (Legislative) passes a bill, the president (Executive) has the power to veto it but Congress can also override the veto with a supermajority vote.
The Supreme Court (Judicial) and other federal courts can declare laws (Legislative) or presidential actions (Executive) unconstitutional.
The Senate (Legislative) confirms the president’s (Executive) nominations for judicial (Judicial) appointments.
The House (Legislative) can impeach the President (Executive) or judges (Judicial). If the Senate (Legislative) finds the person guilty, they are removed from office.

The idea of checks and balances in government dates back to ancient times. The Greek statesman Polybius identified it as a “mixed” regime with three branches: monarchy… aristocracy…and democracy.

These concepts influenced later ideas about a separation of powers being crucial to self-government.

Years later, in his work The Spirit of the Laws in the 18th century, author Montesquieu codified the idea of “checks and balances” when he warned of the threat of despotism by suggesting that there should be different parts of the government to exercise legislative, executive and judicial authority, all under the rule of law.

Montesquieu’s suggestion was later adapted by James Madison who wrote in the Federalist Papers:

The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny…

If men were angels, no government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty is this: You must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place, oblige it to control itself.

Most historians agree that, like with any part of living history, the system of checks and balances has served our country well but goes through periods of stress, particularly during events like government shutdowns.

As noted by The Hill:

Our forefathers in their wisdom established a system of checks and balances in our Constitution to limit power in any one branch of government. That system has worked effectively for more than 200 years to limit power, but it also led to periods of legislative gridlock. We are in one of those periods of total gridlock with the current partial shutdown of the federal government. Each of the parties has dug in.

Throughout the years, many have argued that the system of checks and balances is failing.

During President Donald Trump’s administration, the system of “checks and balances” came under intense scrutiny, with a litany of articles suggesting the 45th president, with help from Congress, had placed too much power in the hands of the Executive branch.

The Atlantic noted:

By the letter of the Constitution, and by the unwritten norms of American separation-of-powers governance, the main restraint on an overreaching, dishonest, or incompetent executive is a resolute legislative branch. But today’s legislative leaders—Mitch McConnell and his slim Republican majority in the Senate, Paul Ryan and his large Republican majority in the House—are ostentatiously refusing to play that check-and-balance function.

Many attribute the rise of intense partisanship in the early 21st century to further erosion of the U.S. system of checks and balances.

Uses of “checks and balances”

Washington Post (November 22, 2022): “Checks and balances are a cornerstone of our free society, and they are mentioned often in our founding documents.”

Axios (December 1, 2022): “Clinton said she’s changed her mind on more checks and balances regarding elections being codified, saying they should.”

checks and balances, principle of government under which separate branches are empowered to prevent actions by other branches and are induced to share power. Checks and balances are applied primarily in constitutional governments. They are of fundamental importance in tripartite governments, such as that of the United States, which separate powers among legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

The Greek historian Polybius analyzed the ancient Roman mixed constitution under three main divisions: monarchy (represented by the consul); aristocracy (the Senate); and democracy (the people). He greatly influenced later ideas about the separation of powers.

Checks and balances, which modify the separation of powers, may operate under parliamentary systems through exercise of a parliament’s prerogative to adopt a no-confidence vote in a government; the government, or cabinet, in turn, ordinarily may dissolve the parliament. The British Parliament is supreme, and laws passed by it are not subject to review by the courts for constitutionality. In France, under the Fifth Republic (1958), a Constitutional Council of nine members (appointed for nine years by the president, Senate, and National Assembly) reviews the constitutionality of legislation. The Federal Republic of Germany combines features of parliamentary systems and of federal systems like that of the United States. It vests the right to declare a law unconstitutional in the Federal Constitutional Court (1951).

The framers of the U.S. Constitution, who were influenced by Montesquieu and William Blackstone among others, saw checks and balances as essential for the security of liberty under the Constitution: “It is by balancing each of these powers against the other two, that the efforts in human nature toward tyranny can alone be checked and restrained, and any degree of freedom preserved in the constitution” (John Adams). Though not expressly covered in the text of the Constitution, judicial review—the power of the courts to examine the actions of the legislative and the executive and administrative arms of government to ensure that they are constitutional—became an important part of government in the United States. Other checks and balances include the presidential veto of legislation (which Congress may override by a two-thirds vote) and executive and judicial impeachment by Congress. Only Congress can appropriate funds, and each house serves as a check on possible abuses of power or unwise action by the other. Congress, by initiating constitutional amendments, can in practice reverse decisions of the Supreme Court. The president appoints the members of the Supreme Court but only with the consent of the Senate, which also approves certain other executive appointments. The Senate also must approve treaties.

From 1932 the U.S. Congress exercised a so-called legislative veto. Clauses in certain laws qualified the authority of the executive branch to act by making specified acts subject to disapproval by the majority vote of one or both houses. In 1983, in a case concerning the deportation of an alien, the U.S. Supreme Court held that legislative vetoes were unconstitutional (the House of Representatives had overturned the Justice Department’s suspension of the alien’s deportation). The decision affected clauses in some 200 laws covering a wide range of subjects, including presidential war powers, foreign aid and arms sales, environmental protection, consumer interests, and others. Despite the court’s decision, Congress continued to exercise this power, including the legislative veto in at least 11 of the bills it passed in 1984 alone.

Checks and balances that evolved from custom and Constitutional conventions include the congressional committee system and investigative powers, the role of political parties, and presidential influence in initiating legislation.

Get a Britannica Premium subscription and gain access to exclusive content. Subscribe Now

In one-party political systems, informal, and perhaps even illegal, checks and balances may operate when organs of an authoritarian or totalitarian regime compete for power.

See also Federalist papers; judicial review; and powers, separation of.