Judicial review

Definition

Judicial review is the power of courts to evaluate the constitutionality of legislative acts and government actions. This essential legal principle allows courts to ensure that laws and actions are in line with the constitution, protecting individual rights and maintaining the rule of law. It serves as a crucial mechanism for checks and balances within the government, ensuring that no branch exceeds its authority.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. Judicial review was established in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison in 1803, where the Supreme Court asserted its authority to invalidate laws that conflicted with the Constitution.
2. This power allows courts to check the actions of Congress and the President, ensuring that laws and executive actions comply with constitutional standards.
3. Judicial review serves as a safeguard for individual rights by allowing courts to strike down laws that may infringe upon those rights.
4. Not all countries have judicial review; it is primarily a feature of common law systems like that of the United States.
5. Judicial review can lead to significant changes in law and policy, as seen when courts overturn legislation that fails to meet constitutional requirements.

Review Questions

• How does judicial review enhance the system of checks and balances within the government?
  • Judicial review enhances checks and balances by allowing the judiciary to assess whether legislative and executive actions are constitutional. This means that if Congress passes a law or the President takes an action that exceeds their authority, the courts can step in to invalidate those actions. This process ensures that no single branch of government becomes too powerful and that all actions are held accountable to the Constitution.
• What implications does judicial review have on individual rights and due process?
  • Judicial review has profound implications for individual rights and due process by providing a mechanism through which individuals can challenge laws or government actions that they believe violate their constitutional rights. Courts can evaluate whether laws comply with due process requirements, ensuring fair treatment under the law. When courts exercise judicial review, they can protect marginalized groups from discriminatory laws and uphold fundamental liberties.
• Evaluate how judicial review has evolved over time and its impact on contemporary legal interpretations.
  • Judicial review has evolved significantly since its inception in Marbury v. Madison, shaping contemporary legal interpretations by addressing issues such as civil rights, privacy, and federalism. Over time, landmark rulings have expanded or limited governmental powers in various contexts, reflecting changing societal values. This evolution demonstrates how judicial review not only influences specific cases but also helps define broader constitutional principles in modern governance.

Related terms

Constitutionality: The quality or state of being in accordance with the Constitution, which serves as the supreme law of the land.

Checks and Balances: A system that ensures no one branch of government becomes too powerful by providing each branch with specific powers to limit the others.

Due Process: The legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights owed to a person, encompassing both procedural and substantive protections.