Judicial Review

Examples of Judicial Review in the following topics:

• The Power of Judicial Review

  • Judicial review is the doctrine where legislative and executive actions are subject to review by the judiciary.
  • Judicial review is the doctrine under which legislative and executive actions are subject to review by the judiciary.
  • Specific courts with judicial review power must annul the acts of the state when it finds them incompatible with a higher authority.
  • Judicial review is an example of the separation of powers in a modern governmental system.
  • Explain the significance of judicial review in the history of the Supreme Court

• Informal Methods of Amending the Constitution: Societal Change and Judicial Review

  • Informal amendments mean that the Constitution does not specifically list these processes as forms of amending the Constitution, but because of change in society or judicial review changed the rule of law de facto.
  • This type of change occurs in two major forms: through circumstantial change and through judicial review.
  • In the United States, federal and state courts at all levels, both appellate and trial, are able to review and declare the constitutionality of legislation relevant to any case properly within their jurisdiction.
  • In American legal language, "judicial review" refers primarily to the adjudication of constitutionality of statutes, especially by the Supreme Court of the United States.
  • Describe the ways of "informally" amending the Constitution, such as societal change and judicial review.

• Judicial Federalism

  • Much of judicial federalism is dependent on judicial review as well as other acts defining the judiciary's role in the U.S. government.
  • The Judiciary Act thereby incorporated the concept of judicial review.
  • The Supreme Court's landmark decision on the issue of judicial review was Marbury v.
  • Since that time, the federal courts have exercised the power of judicial review.
  • Judicial review is now a well settled doctrine.

• Marbury v. Madison

  • The landmark Supreme Court case,, firmly established the basis for the exercise of judicial review.
  • Supreme Court decision in which the Court established the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution.
  • The petition was therefore denied, but more importantly, the precedent for the Court's power of judicial review - not specificially enumerated in the Constitution - was established.
  • Madison, refers to the establishment of the principle of judicial review.
  • Madison created between the executive and judicial branches of government

• Judicial Review and Marbury v. Madison

  • Madison (1803) was a landmark case that laid the foundation for the exercise of judicial review in the United States.
  • Madison (1803) is a landmark case in U.S. law that laid the foundation for the exercise of judicial review under Article III of the Constitution.
  • Many legal scholars argue that the power of judicial review in the United States predated Marbury v.
  • Nothing in the text of the Constitution, however, had explicitly authorized the power of judicial review prior to this monumental case.
  • Madison and the ensuing principle of judicial review

• The Supreme Court as Policy Makers

  • The Constitution does not grant the Supreme Court the power of judicial review but the power to overturn laws and executive actions.
  • The Constitution does not explicitly grant the Supreme Court the power of judicial review but the power of the Court to overturn laws and executive actions it deems unlawful or unconstitutional is well-established.
  • Many of the Founding Fathers accepted the notion of judicial review.
  • On the other hand, through its power of judicial review, the Supreme Court has defined the scope and nature of the powers and separation between the legislative and executive branches of the federal government.

• The Last Days of the Federal Presidency: The Midnight Judges

  • However, Marshall had established the foundational concept of judicial review—the power of the Supreme Court to rule on the constitutionality of congressional legislation and presidential acts.
  • According to the Constitution, there is one simple provision that "the judicial power of the United States shall be vested in one supreme Court. " What this judicial power was or how the Court was to wield it is left remarkably blank in the rest of the document.
  • Madison, Justice Marshall defined the Court's judicial power as the authority to judge the actions of the other two federal branches of government—claiming that judicial review was a logical and implicit principle established in the Constitution.
  • Therefore, although Federalist party quietly dissolved in the early nineteenth century, judicial review established an enduring legacy of the Federalist vision of government that continues to guide the federal system.

• Strict Scrutiny

  • The legal standard of strict scrutiny, the most stringent standard of judicial review, must be used in all court cases involving affirmative action.
  • Strict scrutiny is the most stringent standard of judicial review used in American courts .
  • The other members of the hierarchy of standards are, at the lowest level, "rational basis review" and, at the intermediate level, "intermediate scrutiny."
  • The Supreme Court has consistently found that classification based on race, national origin, and alienage require strict scrutiny review.

• Checks and Balances

  • The legislative branch of the United States checks and monitors the executive and judicial branches.
  • Courts check both the executive branch and the legislative branch through judicial review.
  • Judicial review in the United States refers to the power of a court to review the constitutionality of a statute or treaty, or to review an administrative regulation for consistency with either a statute, a treaty, or the Constitution itself.
  • The Supreme Court's landmark decision on the issue of judicial review was Marbury v.
  • Since that time, the federal courts have exercised the power of judicial review.

• Judicial Activism and Restraint

  • Judicial activism is based on personal/political considerations and judicial restraint encourages judges to limit their power.
  • Judicial activism describes judicial rulings suspected of being based on personal or political considerations rather than on existing law.
  • The definition of judicial activism and which specific decisions are activist, is a controversial political issue.
  • Defenders say that in many cases it is a legitimate form of judicial review and that interpretations of the law must change with the times.
  • Judicial restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power.