Supreme Court Case That Established the Practice of Judicial Review

The Power of Judicial Review

Article Three of the U.Due south. Constitution describes the powers and duties of the judicial branch.  Nowhere does it mention the power of the courts to review actions of the other two branches, and perchance declare these actions unconstitutional.  This ability, called Judicial Review, was established by the landmark decision in Marbury 5. Madison, 1803.

"It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is…If ii laws conflict with each other, the Courts must determine on the performance of each.  Then, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution… the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the example. This is of the very essence of judicial duty." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803

• Facts about Judicial Review
• Possible Subjects of Judicial Review

• • No law or action can contradict the U.S. Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.
  • The courtroom tin can merely review a constabulary that is brought before it through a police adapt.
  • State courts besides have the power to review state laws or deportment based upon their state constitutions.
• • Legislative actions (laws made by congress)
  • Executive actions (treaties, executive orders issued by the president, or regulations issued past a government agency)
  • Country and local laws

Case Studies

Marbury five. Madison, 1803

• Facts
• Upshot
• Instance History

• When President John Adams did not win a second term in the 1801 election, he used the last days of his presidency to make a big number of political appointments.  When the new president (Thomas Jefferson) took part, he told his Secretarial assistant of Country (James Madison), not to deliver the official paperwork to the government officials who had been appointed past Adams.  Thus the government officials, including William Marbury, were denied their new jobs.  William Marbury petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus, to force Madison to deliver the commission.

• Section xiii of the Judiciary Act of 1789 (a constabulary written by Congress), gave the Supreme Court the authority to result writs of mandamus to settle disputes such every bit the one described hither.  This ability to forcefulness actions of government officials went above and across anything mentioned in Article III of the Constitution.

  Therefore, in improver to deciding whether or not William Marbury had a right to his job, the U.S. Supreme Courtroom too had to decide whether or not Department 13 of the Judiciary Act was in violation of the Constitution (the nascence of Judicial Review).

• This case did non achieve the U.Southward. Supreme Court the mode virtually bug do.  Most cases reach the Supreme Court as the courtroom of final resort, when the Justices are asked to review a conclusion of a lower court.  In this case, William Marbury petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court directly due to the provision in Section 13 of the Judiciary Deed of 1789.  Note:  The ability to direct have petitions such as these is not granted to the Supreme Court in the Constitution.

What Do You lot Think The U.S. Supreme Court Decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• Though the Justices agreed that William Marbury had a correct to his job, they likewise ruled that issuing the writ of mandamus to force that to happen did not autumn nether their jurisdiction as stated in the Constitution. The Supreme Court opinion explained that it is within their power and authority to review acts of Congress, such as the Judiciary Deed of 1789, to determine whether or not the law is unconstitutional. Past declaring Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional, the U.S. Supreme Court established the doctrine of Judicial Review.

• The Supreme Court said "The Constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable past ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and, similar other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall delight to alter it. If the (get-go) role of the culling be true, and so a legislative act opposite to the Constitution is not police." by author of opinion, Main Justice John Marshall.

• • The Oyez Project
  • The stance of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • The official version of the stance can be institute in the U.Due south. Reports at your local police library. Marbury v. Madison, v U.S. 137 (1803)

Ladue v. Gilleo, 1994

• Facts
• Issue
• Instance History

• In 1990, Margaret Gilleo placed a sign in the chiliad of her home in Ladue, Missouri. The sign said "Say No to State of war in the Persian Gulf, Telephone call Congress Now." The city of Ladue had a law confronting k signs, and told Ms. Gilleo to have her signs down. Ms. Gilleo sued the city of Ladue for violating her one^st Amendment rights.

• Was Ladue's police force confronting signs unconstitutional?

• Margaret Gilleo sued the city of Ladue in the U.Due south. District Court for the Eastern Commune of Missouri. The court ruled in her favor and stopped Ladue from enforcing the law. Ladue appealed the decision, and the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals likewise found in Ms. Gilleo's favor. The city of Ladue then asked the U.Southward. Supreme Court to review the case.

What Practise You Think The U.S. Supreme Court Decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Learn More

• The U.South. Supreme Court affirmed the conclusion of the lower courts. Ladue's police force confronting yard signs violated the 1^st Subpoena of the U.S. Constitution. The i^st Amendment protects political speech, and banning yard signs takes away the main artery by which people traditionally limited their personal political views. The value of protecting personal political spoken language is more of import than Ladue's want to proceed the urban center gratis of clutter.

• The Supreme Court said "They may non afford the same opportunities for conveying complex ideas as do other media, but residential signs accept long been an important and distinct medium of expression." past author of opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens.

• • The Oyez Project
  • The stance of the U.S. Supreme Courtroom
  • The official version of the opinion tin can exist establish in the U.S. Reports at your local law library.
    Ladue five. Gilleo, 512 U.South. 43 (1994)

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections, 1966

• Facts
• Issue
• Case History

• Annie Harper was not allowed to annals to vote in Virginia because she wasn't able to pay the state's poll tax. Virginia law required voters to pay $1.50 revenue enhancement to register, with the money collected going to public school funding. Ms. Harper sued the Virginia Board of Elections, claiming the poll taxation violated her 14^th Subpoena correct to equal protection. Annotation: The 24^th Amendment to the Constitution already banned poll taxes in federal elections, just not in state elections.

• Was the Virginia law requiring a tax to vote in a state ballot unconstitutional?

• The U.S. District Court dismissed Ms. Harper's suit in favor of the Board of Elections. She then asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.

What Do You Think The U.S. Supreme Courtroom Decided?

• Decision
• Quote
• Larn More than

• The Supreme Court declared the Virginia poll tax law unconstitutional. By making information technology more difficult for poor people to vote, the state was violating the 14^th Subpoena guarantee of equal protection. Voting is a central right, and should remain attainable to all citizens. The amount of wealth someone has should have no begetting on their ability to vote freely.

• The Supreme Court said "We conclude that a State violates the …(Constitution).. …whenever information technology makes the affluence of the voter or payment of whatsoever fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth nor to paying or non paying this or any other tax….Wealth or fee paying has, in our view, no relation to voting qualifications; the right to vote is too precious, also fundamental to exist then burdened or conditioned." by author of stance, Justice William O. Douglas

• • The Oyez Project
  • The stance of the U.S. Supreme Court
  • The official version of the opinion can be plant in the U.S. Reports at your local law library. Harper 5. Virginia Board of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 (1966)

The Power of Judicial Review

Directions: Click Commencement to begin the Student Challenge. Use the ARROW to movement through the questions. Check your RESULTS at the cease.

Congratulations - you have completed The Ability of Judicial Review. Y'all scored %%SCORE%% out of %%Total%%. Your performance has been rated as %%RATING%%

Your answers are highlighted below.

At that place are four questions to complete.

Shaded items are consummate.

ane

2

three

4

Finish

You lot accept completed

questions

question

Your score is

Correct

Wrong

Fractional-Credit

You have non finished your quiz. If you leave this folio, your progress will be lost.

Correct Answer

You Selected

Not Attempted

Last Score on Quiz

Attempted Questions Correct

Attempted Questions Wrong

Questions Not Attempted

Total Questions on Quiz

Question Details

Results

Date

Score

Hint

Time allowed

minutes

seconds

Fourth dimension used

Answer Choice(southward) Selected

Question Text

All washed

Demand more practise!

Keep trying!

Corking!

Good work!

Perfect!

rileywrinke.blogspot.com

Source: https://judiciallearningcenter.org/the-power-of-judicial-review/