Final answer:
Judicial review allows courts to declare legislative or executive actions unconstitutional if they conflict with the Constitution. Established in Marbury v. Madison, it has been exercised by various courts, not just the Supreme Court. It has resulted in approximately 170 federal and 1400 state laws being ruled unconstitutional.
Step-by-step explanation:
When considering the accuracy of statements regarding judicial review, it's important to understand its role and application in the legal system. First, judicial review is the process by which the courts analyze whether a legislative or executive action is in accordance with the Constitution.
Though not explicitly stated in the Constitution, this principle was established in the landmark Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, providing the judiciary with the power to declare acts of other branches unconstitutional.
The Supreme Court has indeed ruled acts of Congress to be unconstitutional approximately 170 times, slightly less than the 200 times mentioned in statementa, making it a relatively rare occurrence.
Also, the scope of judicial review extends beyond the Supreme Court to lower federal courts and state courts, which can all review the constitutionality of both federal and state laws. Therefore, the power of judicial review is not limited to the Supreme Court, refuting statement d.
It is also not accurate to say that state laws have been found unconstitutional at a much lower rate compared to federal laws. In fact, around 1400 state laws have been struck down, which indicates that state laws have been subject to judicial review with some frequency.
Lastly, while the principle of judicial review does involve assessing the constitutionality of legislation, it does not inherently support the legislation; instead, it ensures that laws do not conflict with the highest law of the land, the Constitution.
Therefore, the power of judicial review is not limited to the Supreme Court, refuting statement d.