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 ensures that all branches of government operate within their constitutional limits, maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution as the highest law of the land.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Judicial review was established in the United States with the landmark case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, which asserted the Supreme Court's authority to invalidate laws conflicting with the Constitution.
2. Judicial review is a critical mechanism for protecting individual rights by allowing courts to strike down laws or actions that infringe upon constitutional freedoms.
3. Not all countries grant judicial review, making it a unique aspect of American constitutional law and a key feature of the checks and balances system.
4. The scope of judicial review can vary, with some courts being more active in reviewing legislation than others, impacting the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates.
5. Judicial review can be influenced by public opinion and political pressures, raising questions about its impartiality and the role of justices in shaping policy through their interpretations.

Review Questions

• How does judicial review contribute to maintaining constitutional supremacy within government?
  • Judicial review ensures that laws and actions by government entities comply with the Constitution, effectively safeguarding against abuses of power. By allowing courts to nullify unconstitutional acts, it reinforces the principle that no one is above the law, thereby maintaining constitutional supremacy. This function protects individual rights and promotes accountability among legislators and executives.
• What are some landmark cases that have shaped the practice of judicial review in the United States?
  • Landmark cases such as Marbury v. Madison established the foundation for judicial review by affirming the Supreme Court's power to invalidate unconstitutional laws. Other significant cases include Brown v. Board of Education, which addressed racial segregation and civil rights, and Roe v. Wade, which dealt with reproductive rights. These cases demonstrate how judicial review can influence social change and policy through constitutional interpretation.
• Evaluate the impact of judicial review on the relationship between legislative intent and constitutional mandates, particularly in light of modern challenges.
  • Judicial review significantly impacts how legislative intent aligns with constitutional mandates, often leading to tension between lawmakers and the judiciary. As societal values evolve, courts may interpret constitutional provisions in ways that challenge existing laws, raising questions about democratic legitimacy. This dynamic reflects ongoing debates over issues like healthcare, immigration, and civil liberties, highlighting how judicial review can be both a protector of rights and a source of controversy in navigating contemporary legal challenges.

Related terms

Constitutionalism: The principle that government authority is derived from and limited by a body of fundamental law.

Separation of Powers:

The division of governmental responsibilities into distinct branches to prevent any one branch from exercising the core functions of another.

Checks and Balances: A system that ensures that political power is not concentrated in any one branch of government, allowing each branch to limit the powers of the others.