Final answer:
The Supreme Court should find a law unconstitutional if it does not satisfy any one of the criteria of the Lemon Test: secular purpose, neutrality toward religion, and no excessive entanglement with religion. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court to maintain constitutional boundaries and invalidate conflicting laws.
Step-by-step explanation:
According to the Lemon Test, a Supreme Court decision about a law's constitutionality depends on three criteria: a secular legislative purpose, a primary effect that neither advances nor inhibits religion, and no excessive government entanglement with religion. If any of these criteria are not met, the law is deemed unconstitutional. Given the information, if a law fails to meet even one of these requirements, the Supreme Court should find the law unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court exercises judicial review to ensure that laws abide by the Constitution. Judicial review is central to maintaining the balance of power among the branches of government and protecting individual rights. When a law is in conflict with the Constitution, it is the Supreme Court's role to interpret and potentially invalidate the law.
In the context of the Lemon Test and its ongoing influence, despite some relaxations in standards since the original Lemon v. Kurtzman decision, the test remains a key criterion for evaluating cases related to the establishment clause, guiding the Court in its decisions.