How does the doctrine of judicial review as
laid out in John Marshall’s famous opinion in Marbury v. Madison impact our
understanding of the federal judiciary and separation of powers? What
reasoning led John Marshall to create this power for the judiciary? Were
there any problems with his meaning?
Please be sure to define judicial review. Also,
please include that it is the Judiciary and the Judiciary alone that can
interpret the law and the constitutionality of the actions of both the Congress
and the President. Marshall was the first to exercise this power
(judicial review) of the Courts, and it was very controversial at the time and
it is still controversial when the Court overturns actions of either of the two
political branches. Please also mention that by exercising judicial
review for the first time, Marshall was carving out a power for the Judiciary,
elevating it in its status and power to that of the other two branches of
government. Many thought that Marshall believed this to be a necessary
act since many at the time (in the early 19th century) believed that the
Judiciary was the weakest and least prestigious of the three branches of
government. With regard to the part of the Question #4 that asks,
“Were there any problems with his reasoning?”, feel free to mention
that many constitutional historians believe that while Marshall’s use of
judicial review was necessary in order to establish the Court’s authority as
the sole interpreter of what is lawful (constitutional), this act was also a
power grab on his part.
need this is in the following format:
cover page / 1.5 – 2 pages of information / additional page listing all sources
footnotes as needed
no plagiarism my instructor will check.
you in advance.