Judicial Review Research Paper Examples

Judicial review the doctrine through which the judiciary examines the actions of the executive and the legislature to ensure they are in line with the constitution and other relevant laws. Judicial review is more of procedural than substantive. The court looks at whether the right procedure was followed in arriving at a certain decision.
The 1803 case of Marbury versus Madison is an important classic when the topic of judicial review at the federal level is mentioned. Judicial review was especially vibrant at the state level as compared to the federal level. The brief facts of the case are that President John Adams as the justice of peace in Columbia had appointed William Marbury but the commission was not delivered. Marbury made a petition to the Supreme Court seeking a mandamus to compel the new secretary of state to deliver the documents.
There were several issues for the court's determination. These were the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus, whether Marbury could find a remedy in law, whether he had a right to the commission and whether the court had authority over review on matters arising from the Congress.
Chief Justice Marshall faced a serious matter. Marshall held that Marbury was entitled to the commission, that the effect of the commission automatically took place when the president signed it. It was further held that the Supreme Court had jurisdiction to review the decisions of the congress. On whether Marbury could find a remedy in law, the affirmative was held. This was because it is the essential duty of the state to grant an aggrieved person remedy. Chief Justice Marshall maintained that it was responsibility of the Supreme Court to overturn unconstitutional laws. This is based on the sworn oath to uphold the constitution to the letter as per Article six of the constitution.
This precedent had a major influence on the war between the federalists and the anti-federalists at the judiciary level. The antifederalists argued that the power of the Supreme courts to review the decisions of the state courts was a threat to the sovereignty of the states. Automatically, the Marbury case gave a win to the federalists. The political role played by this case is that the Supreme Court affirmed its jurisdiction to review the acts of the president and the congress and declare them unconstitutional (Nelson).
The ruling in this case opened a way for the slow but sure growth of federalism at the expense of the state’s and the people’s sovereignty. The final fact was a general acceptance that the Supreme Court had the jurisdiction to influence federal and state laws (Schweikart and Allen).
Marshall’s concept of the power of the courts to conduct a judicial review influenced the balance of powers between local and federal governments. Formerly, the state power of judicial review derived from an express provision of the constitution. The federal power of judicial review derived from the case of Marbury versus Madison. It can be concluded as an outgrowth of political struggles between the federalists and anti-federalists. The federalists and anti-federalists had taken advantage of the statues of the judiciary but with Marshall’s decision, the struggle was somehow resolved.

Works Cited

Nelson, William Edward. Marbury v Madison: The Origins and Legacy of Judicial Review. New York, 2000.
Schweikart and Allen. A patriot's History of the United States. New York: HarperCollins, 2012.