Final answer:
The Supreme Court exercises judicial review to invalidate laws conflicting with the U.S. Constitution, with landmark cases such as Brown v. Board of Education and Lawrence v. Texas being notable examples. Despite this power, the Court has used it sparingly, striking down less than 0.25% of federal laws and around 1400 state laws in its history.
Step-by-step explanation:
Understanding Supreme Court's Authority in Overturning Laws
The Supreme Court has a pivotal role in the judicial system of the United States, including the authority to declare laws unconstitutional. This power, known as judicial review, was established in the landmark case of Marbury vs. Madison. Throughout history, this power has been exercised cautiously, with the Supreme Court invalidating a relatively small percentage of federal and state laws.
For instance, landmark cases such as Brown v. Board of Education demonstrate the Court's crucial role in shaping legal and social norms, by overturning state laws that mandated or allowed segregated schools. While the Supreme Court has voided nearly 1400 state laws, the process is rare, showing judicial restraint. The elimination of literacy tests, the 'one-man, one-vote' decision in Baker v. Carr, and the nullification of sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas exemplify the way in which the Court ensures the protection of constitutional principles, such as equality and the right to privacy.
The actions of the Supreme Court reflect a balance between respect for legislative authority and upholding constitutional protections. Statutes may be nullified when they conflict with the Constitution, as seen with cases handling discrimination, electoral laws, and civil rights. These decisions often have far-reaching implications for American society and government.