The Judicial Review Process

Good Essays
The founding fathers of the Constitution did not want the government to have too much power in any one agency, so they divided the government into the executive, legislative and judicial branch to avoid tyranny. The Supreme Court is the authority of the judicial branch and the highest of all courts, which can examine the laws and decisions made by Congress and declares them unconstitutional. This does not mean that the Supreme Court has unlimited power because each branch partakes in checks and balance in providing a government of the people. The role of the Supreme Court is to not only to ensure the people equal justice under the Constitution but to also provide as checks and balance within the government. Since the Constitution is complex, …show more content…
While judicial review is not noted in the Constitution, Madison had intended the U.S. Constitution to be evaluated by independent judges instead of through conflicting political bargaining. [3] Of course, the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review was not implemented until 1803 in connection with the case Marbury v. Madison. In Marbury v. Madison, John Marshall, the Chief Justice, pointed out that it was necessary for the Supreme Court to have the power to overturn unconstitutional legislation. [4] Ever since, the Supreme Court has used this power to review the laws to make sure they are constitutional. The judicial review process gives the Court the responsibility to ensure individual rights and maintain the Constitution as new issues arise in a complicated and changing society. …show more content…
[8] Of course, this seem to fit the judicial review process by providing the Court the ability to ensure individual rights and maintain the living constitution as new issues arise in changing society. On the other hand, the living constitutional ideal adds that interpreting the meaning of the Constitution under old views is outdated and needs to evolve without being formally amended. [9] The founding fathers were aware of the need for change to fit the needs of society, but to make those changes it must be formally amended and not left up to the judiciary branch to make that decision. This is apparent under U. S. Const. art. V, which provides the option to propose an amendment if two-thirds of the House find it necessary or through the national convention and requested by two-thirds if the state legislature.

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    During the period of 1801 through 1817, the conflict of the Democratic-Republican views on the constitution were arguing against the ideas of the Federalists. The two parties believed in completely different ideas of how to interpret the constitution. Although the parties knew they must come to some agreement in how the constitution should be interpreted they both had some very good reasons there party was correct. The Democratic-Republicans believed in interpreting the constitution exactly. This means that the Congress or the President should follow the constitution word for word.…

    • 411 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Government Vs Constitution

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages

    He also argues that the judiciary merely has the power of judgment, rather than force or will, and that the judiciary depends on the other two branches to support its judgments. However, when the Supreme Court makes a decision, this decision stands since it is deemed “the supreme law of the land”. In Marbury v. Madison, Marshall argued that it is a responsibility of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional legislation in accordance to the judges’ “oath or affirmation” to uphold the Constitution, as described in Article VI. Although Hamilton argues that the judiciary is in “continual jeopardy of being overpowered, awed, or influenced” by the other two branches of government, with judicial review the Supreme Court can decide if a treaty violates the provisions of existing law or…

    • 1410 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Even though Aristotle had claimed democracy to be a despotic form of government, the framers decided to make it the United States a democracy anyway. Although it may seem like they ignored Aristotle’s belief on democracy, the framers highly considered the dangers of having a democracy as a government. This is why they added certain mechanisms into the constitution to avoid tyranny and advocate the rule of law. Aristotle stated that laws should be full of intelligence, reason and should not be made for personal gain. He also believed that the rule of law should be a well-balanced mixture of human law and the law of nature.…

    • 1187 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    However, Chief Justice John Marshall didn’t follow through because he felt the Constitution didn’t grant the Supreme Court the power to do this, even though the Judiciary Act of 1789 did. Marshall realized that Congress had exceeded its power and, according to the Constitution, the decision was left to the Courts (History.com Staff, 2009). This inconsistency led to judicial review, which not only emphasized the Supreme Court’s power to be the final interpreter of the Constitution and “supreme law of the land”, but made the government recognize the Judicial Branch as equal and necessary (“Marbury v. Madison…

    • 1408 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Ten Amendments

    • 1805 Words
    • 8 Pages

    It is said that by adding amendments as well as changing the interpretation of the current amendments potentially changes what the founding fathers intended for the constitution. The intention to write the constitution was to help our society change but the many who argue that it should not alter do not wish for changes like women voting. “The role of federal courts, particularly the supreme court is to interpret the laws, including the United States Constitution, and render decisions in the legal cases that arise under their jurisdiction within the framework of legal precedents- no to nudge the constitution to new meanings not included in the original text” (Jacobs 3). Changing the constitution could potentially hurt our society and government today. Today’s society will be hurt by the things we change within the constitution.…

    • 1805 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A writ of mandamus is a specific court order because it is made without the benefit of the judicial process or before a case has contemplated. It may be expressed by a court at any time that it is appropriate. Usually, it is issued in a case that has already started. (Eric Foner and John A. Garraty) The Supreme had announced for the very first time that a law had been passed by Congress and had been signed by the President unconstitutionally; after John Marshall, Chief Justice, wrote: “A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” However, Marshall believed that the Supreme Court should have an equal role to the other two branches of the government. (Milestone Documents in the National Archives) John Jay, Alexander Hamilton, and Jams Madison gave the executive and legislative branches powers that would limit each other as well as the judiciary branch.…

    • 708 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Justice Macalia Textualism

    • 1571 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Nonetheless, Justice Scalia argues that in the event that intent is not projected well, why not include the right materials for the court’s consideration? (Scalia 16). For that reason, the textualism approach views only the founder’s intent. On the other hand, for Justices who adhere to living/evolving Constitution approach, intent is interpreted in a different manner. For Justices who interpret the law with the living Constitution approach, intent is grounded on what the legislator meant when the law was written.…

    • 1571 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Congress: Enumerated Powers

    • 2415 Words
    • 10 Pages

    This clause gives Congress the power make any necessary and proper laws to carry out its enumerated powers. 1. b) Although the Founders wanted the legislative branch to have enough power to carry out its duties, they also were in fear of a branch that was too strong and therefore placed constraints on the powers Congress has. Creating a bicameral…

    • 2415 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    They adjust their outcomes based on the responses of the government. In the Obergefell case, the court should exercise the constitutional laws of a democratic system while avoiding the whims of the majority. The court must play the essential role of a protector of the constitutional rights. The efforts will probably result in a difference in opinions from the law enforcers in the case, but it is the only way to practice democracy. (Katz, par.…

    • 1148 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    They wanted to create a government without tyranny and they did by creating federalism, separation of powers, checks and balances, and the small state big state compromise. Federalism helps guard against tyranny by separating the state and federal courts. This makes it difficult for one government figure to seize control. James Madison…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays