Judicial review

Definition

Judicial review is the power of courts to assess whether a law, policy, or executive action is in accordance with the constitution. This process allows courts to invalidate laws or actions that violate constitutional principles, thus serving as a crucial check on the legislative and executive branches of government.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Judicial review was established in the United States by the landmark Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison in 1803.
2. This power allows the judiciary to act as a guardian of the constitution, ensuring that no laws or actions contravene constitutional mandates.
3. Judicial review enhances the system of checks and balances by enabling courts to oversee and potentially nullify actions taken by the legislative and executive branches.
4. Not all countries have judicial review; its presence varies widely across different constitutional systems around the world.
5. Judicial review can lead to significant social change, as courts may strike down laws that are deemed discriminatory or unjust, reshaping public policy.

Review Questions

• How does judicial review function as a check on legislative and executive power?
  • Judicial review functions as a check on legislative and executive power by allowing courts to evaluate the constitutionality of laws and actions enacted by these branches. When a law or executive action is found to violate constitutional principles, courts can invalidate it, preventing potential overreach. This process ensures that all branches of government operate within the boundaries set by the constitution, maintaining a balance of power.
• Evaluate the implications of judicial review on the concept of democracy in modern governance.
  • Judicial review has significant implications for democracy as it reinforces the idea that laws must align with constitutional rights and values. While it protects individual liberties and minority rights from majority rule, it can also lead to tensions between elected representatives and appointed judges. The ability of courts to overturn legislation raises questions about accountability and representation, highlighting the complex interplay between judicial authority and democratic principles.
• Assess how judicial review has shaped political discourse regarding civil rights in contemporary society.
  • Judicial review has played a pivotal role in shaping political discourse on civil rights by allowing courts to intervene in cases of discrimination and inequality. Landmark rulings have advanced civil rights protections, leading to broader societal change and influencing public policy debates. As courts continue to interpret constitutional rights, they challenge existing norms and inspire movements for social justice, making judicial review a key player in the ongoing struggle for equality in contemporary society.

Related terms

Constitutionalism: The principle that government authority is derived from and limited by a constitution, ensuring the protection of individual rights and the rule of law.

Separation of Powers:

A political doctrine that divides government responsibilities into distinct branches to prevent any one branch from exercising the core functions of another.

Precedent: A legal principle established in previous court cases that is used as a standard in subsequent similar cases.