separation of powers

American  

[sep-uh-rey-shuhn uhv pou-erz] / ˈsɛp əˌreɪ ʃən əv ˈpaʊ ərz /

noun

1. the principle or system of vesting in separate branches the executive, legislative, and judicial powers of a government.

---

separation of powers Cultural  

1. A fundamental principle of the United States government, whereby powers and responsibilities are divided among the legislative branch, executive branch, and judicial branch. The officials of each branch are selected by different procedures and serve different terms of office; each branch may choose to block action of the other branches through the system of checks and balances. The framers of the Constitution designed this system to ensure that no one branch would accumulate too much power and that issues of public policy and welfare would be given comprehensive consideration before any action was taken.

---

Compare meaning

How does separation-of-powers compare to similar and commonly confused words? Explore the most common comparisons:

• separation of powers vs. checks and balances

Example Sentences

Levitt, who worked in the administrations of presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, said this was partly because of the huge size of the United States but also a "separation of powers" and an "anti-corruption measure."

From Barron's

But I just want to note that, from a separation of powers point of view, it’s very interesting to see federal judges seeming to distrust official accounts of events from the executive branch.

From Salon

In recent years, states including Wisconsin, Michigan and Kentucky have waged similar battles over separation of powers.

From Salon

The separation of powers is explicitly enshrined in North Carolina’s constitution, which declares, “The legislative, executive, and supreme judicial powers of the State government shall be forever separate and distinct from each other.”

From Salon

On this week’s Slate Plus bonus episode of Amicus, co-hosts Dahlia Lithwick and Mark Joseph Stern discuss the ruling and its encouraging implications for the separation of powers and a bolstered Congress subject to a president who refuses to acknowledge most limits on his authority.

From Slate