Judicial review

Definition

Judicial review is the power of courts to examine and invalidate actions by the legislative and executive branches of government that are found to be unconstitutional. This essential function helps maintain the rule of law and protects individual rights by ensuring that laws and governmental actions comply with constitutional principles, fostering a system of checks and balances.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Judicial review was established in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, where the Supreme Court asserted its authority to strike down laws that violate the Constitution.
2. State supreme courts also have the power of judicial review, allowing them to interpret their state constitutions and invalidate state laws or actions that do not conform.
3. Judicial review promotes accountability in government by allowing the judiciary to check the powers of the other branches, ensuring that constitutional rights are protected.
4. The application of judicial review can vary significantly between state and federal courts, influenced by differing state constitutions and legal precedents.
5. Judicial review is a key component of federalism, as it allows for both state and federal courts to play a role in interpreting the Constitution, impacting how laws are applied across different jurisdictions.

Review Questions

• How does judicial review serve as a check on legislative and executive powers?
  • Judicial review serves as a crucial check on legislative and executive powers by empowering courts to evaluate whether actions taken by these branches align with constitutional provisions. When courts find that a law or executive action violates the Constitution, they can declare it null and void. This ensures that all government actions are subject to legal scrutiny, thereby safeguarding individual rights and maintaining a balance of power among branches.
• Discuss the differences in how judicial review is applied at the state level compared to the federal level.
  • At the state level, judicial review allows state courts to interpret state constitutions and assess whether state laws are constitutional. This can lead to different rulings based on varying interpretations of state constitutions compared to federal ones. In contrast, federal judicial review primarily involves the U.S. Constitution. The distinct legal frameworks can result in divergent outcomes on similar issues depending on whether they are addressed in state or federal courts.
• Evaluate the impact of judicial review on the principle of federalism in the United States.
  • Judicial review significantly impacts federalism by allowing both state and federal courts to interpret their respective constitutions, influencing how laws are applied across various jurisdictions. This duality creates a complex legal landscape where different courts may arrive at different conclusions about similar issues based on their constitutional interpretations. The resulting legal pluralism can enhance or undermine federalism depending on how courts navigate conflicts between state and federal laws, ultimately shaping governance at multiple levels.

Related terms

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

Checks and Balances: A system that ensures that no one branch of government becomes too powerful, where each branch has the ability to limit the powers of the others.

Supremacy Clause:

A clause in the U.S. Constitution stating that federal law takes precedence over state laws and constitutions.