Question

Explain the concept of judicial review. how did the supreme court get the power of judicial review? did the u.s. constitution specifically designate the power of judicial review to the supreme court? how can one request the supreme court to accept and review a legal case? how does supreme court decide which case to accept for review? what does it mean "to have a standing" in a legal case? what happens if the supreme court's decision results in a tie? which national issue/debate do you think the u.s. supreme court needs to review in the near future?

Answer 1

Judicial review is the power of courts to declare laws and government actions unconstitutional, a power established by the Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison in 1803. To have the Supreme Court review a case, a petition for a writ of certiorari is filed. 'Standing' means a party must have a substantial interest in the case, and a tie in the Court's decision upholds the lower court's ruling.

Step-by-step explanation:

Understanding Judicial Review

Judicial review is the power of the courts to overturn laws or government actions that are found to be unconstitutional. This means the courts, including the Supreme Court, play an integral role in ensuring that legislative and executive actions are in accord with the United States Constitution. The power of judicial review for the Supreme Court was not explicitly provided in the original Constitution but was firmly established through the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison in 1803, which was presided over by Chief Justice John Marshall.

Marbury v. Madison and the Power of Judicial Review

In the case of Marbury v. Madison, the Supreme Court declared for the first time that an act of Congress was unconstitutional. This established the precedent for judicial review, which has since become a cornerstone of the American legal system. The decision in Marbury v. Madison effectively enhanced the role of the judiciary by giving it the authority to interpret the Constitution and nullify any government action that contravenes it.

Process for Supreme Court Review

To request the Supreme Court to accept and review a legal case, one typically files a petition for a writ of certiorari. The Supreme Court decides which cases to accept for review based on several criteria, including the case's importance to national interests and whether the issue at hand has been inconsistently decided by lower courts.

Standing in a legal case refers to the requirement that a party must have a direct and substantial interest in the outcome of the litigation. Should the Supreme Court's decision result in a tie, typically due to an even number of justices participating, the lower court's decision stands by default.

Significance of Judicial Review

Judicial review serves as an essential check on the powers of the other branches of government, ensuring the supremacy of the Constitution. It is seldom used, but its existence is crucial for maintaining the balance of power within the federal government and protecting individual rights.

Answer 2

The Supreme Court of the United States spends much, if not most, of its time on a task which is not delegated to the Supreme Court by the Constitution. That task is: Hearing cases wherein the constitutionality of a law or regulation is challenged. The Supreme Court's nine Justices attempt to sort out what is, and what is not constitutional. This process is known as Judicial Review. But the states, in drafting the Constitution, did not delegate such a power to the Supreme Court, or to any branch of the government.

Since the constitution does not give this power to the court, you might wonder how it came to be that the court assumed this responsibility. The answer is that the court just started doing it and no one has put a stop to it. This assumption of power took place first in 1794 when the Supreme Court declared an act of congress to be unconstitutional, but went largely unnoticed until the landmark case of Marbury v Madison in 1803. Marbury is significant less for the issue that it settled (between Marbury and Madison) than for the fact that Chief Justice John Marshall used Marbury to provide a rationale for judicial review. Since then, the idea that the Supreme Court should be the arbiter of constitutionality issues has become so ingrained that most people incorrectly believe that the Constitution granted this power to the federal judiciary.The Supreme Court received this power after the famous Marbury vs. Madison case in 1803. Accordingly, James Madison (Thomas Jefferson's Secretary of State) refused to seat William Marbury as a District of Columbia justice of the peace. The Supreme Court ruled that it was wrong of Jefferson to use his executive authority to prevent the seating of a judge.