Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

checks and balances

Read a random definition: punitive damages

A quick definition of checks and balances:

Checks and balances is a way of making sure that no one person or group has too much power in the government. It means that each part of the government has the ability to stop or change what the other parts are doing. For example, the president can say no to a new law, but the Congress can say yes anyway if enough people agree. This helps to keep the government fair and prevent any one person or group from becoming too powerful.

A more thorough explanation:

Checks and balances is a system in which each branch of government has the power to limit the actions of the other branches. This ensures that no one branch has too much power and can control the entire government.

For example, the executive branch can veto a law passed by the legislative branch, but the legislative branch can override the veto with a two-thirds majority vote. This means that the executive branch cannot make laws without the approval of the legislative branch.

Another example is the judicial branch, which can declare a law passed by the legislative branch unconstitutional. This means that the legislative branch cannot make laws that violate the Constitution.

Checks and balances is an important part of the United States government and helps to prevent any one branch from becoming too powerful.

checkpoint search | chefe

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
23:21
I don't visit y'all's profiles enough, clearly
NarrowFaithfulCougar
0:22
@NemoPropheta: Ahh yeah, the Sauna. That's some good Nordic shit. Beats the hot tub hands down. Plus everyone is naked.
1:23
@ParallelAgreeableOrangutan: got that weaponized autism in gear, we out here.
@llama: your cycle confuses me, your stats are good and you applied early but all of those Rs? Is there anything weird about your app?
do you have C&F issues or something?
also ur first choice is kansas but you didnt apply there?
12:55
@RasheedWallaceFan: Hi. Yes, I waited for April LSAT, put almost all apps (which were sent really early) so that basically most of my apps were reviewed In May. Shot myself in the foot for 155 -> 161 lmao. Would not recommend 10/10
12:57
@RasheedWallaceFan: unironically, KSLS was my top choice, however by April LSAT their app had closed. It was like waiting to date ur dream partner, but waiting until you graduate uni, then by the time u graduate uni, your soul mate is already married with 2.4 kids and 1.6 dogs. Heartbreak.exe fr fr
12:58
are you R&Ring?
13:00
No, I think what I will do is flip a coin: heds NKU, tails NEL|B what u guys think bout dat. Then once 1L - if good at LS, try to transfer, if bad at LS or one of my grandiose ideas/inventions are viable, drop out and pursue.
oh so you submitted the apps with a lower lsat and then retook
got it
Bettercaulsaul
13:33
Most schools will hold your application for the next test score to be released into your account as well. I was notified by an admissions director that if a decision is processed they will not retroactively go back for the new score even if higher
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
13:34
I vote NEL-Boston so we can be friends :D
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
13:34
But it says you withdrew?? :(
ParallelAgreeableOrangutan
13:41
@Bettercaulsaul: in my experience, there is often an option on the application for you to choose whether you'd like them to review your application as-is ASAP or hold it until your new score is released. but it probably varies by school—I just remember seeing that option on at least a few app forms
2:21
While I am unsure of what option you are referring to, I personally just emailed each school and asked for them to hold my app pending my lsat score release.
2:22
Sorry WNE = Western New England not NEL|B
14:50
Hey guys is anyone online rn
14:51
I need adviceee
15:48
shooooot
hey y'all so im gonna be honest im completely new to all this, i kinda bullshitted and took the LSAT and i have no clue what my odds are of getting into schools. 163 LSAT, 3.17 GPA, and a double major in undergrad i may write about in an addendum
Based on the list I see you made on your profile, you will need to make significant LSAT improvement for those schools to be contenders. Your primary focus should probably be working to get your LSAT practice tests up to a number you are happy with before you retest, and then test until you get a score you like. Don't rush an application cycle or apply late since those will hurt your odds of getting into your school as a splitter. Good luck!
oh that was literally just random stuff i dont know how this works
thank you so much!
im retaking in 4 days, and maybe again in august, and i was gonna apply to see what i got, and if i didnt like it i was going to wait till next cycle and work on improving my GPA
@InnateMatureRhino: wow rude
yall need help fr
0:51
chat should i go to uc davis or loyola
TheOrangeGorillla
1:58
https://www.lsd.law/users/creep/UnsuitableExoticTiger Is this real chat?
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.