Omar Bennett
The US Constitution establishes the federal judiciary in Article III, Section I, which states that the judicial power of the US shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. Article III, Section 2 establishes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, outlining the types of cases the Court has original and appellate jurisdiction over. While the Constitution does not expressly grant federal courts the power of judicial review, it is now considered one of the distinctive features of US constitutional law. Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, and it plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Judicial Power | Vested in one supreme court and inferior courts ordained and established by Congress |
| Judges | Hold office during good behaviour and receive compensation that cannot be diminished during their term |
| Federal Judicial Power | Authority of federal courts to declare federal or state government actions as unconstitutional |
| Supreme Court Jurisdiction | Original jurisdiction over certain cases, e.g., suits between states, cases involving ambassadors |
| Supreme Court Jurisdiction | Appellate jurisdiction on almost any other case involving constitutional or federal law |
| Supreme Court Role | Ensures each branch of government recognises its limits, protects civil rights and liberties, and sets limits on democratic government |
| Supreme Court Decisions | Impact society at large, not just lawyers and judges |
| Congress Power | Ability to make exceptions to the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction through jurisdiction stripping |
| Judiciary Act of 1789 | Established lower federal courts and specified jurisdiction details |
| Constitutional Ratification | Power of states to interpret the meaning of changes to the "supreme law" |
| Judicial Review Opposition | Views that judges should not have the authority to declare laws void or set aside laws |
| Judicial Review Support | Seen as a check on the legislature, protecting against excessive exercise of power |
| Separation of Powers | Courts must not violate this doctrine when engaging in judicial review |
Explore related products
$21.95 $29.99
$9.99 $9.99
What You'll Learn
Judicial review is not expressly granted by the Constitution
Judicial review is the power of the federal courts to determine whether federal or state government actions violate the Constitution. While judicial review is a distinctive feature of United States constitutional law, it is not expressly granted by the Constitution.
Article III, Section I of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary and vests the judicial power of the United States in the Supreme Court and inferior courts established by Congress. However, the Constitution does not explicitly grant these courts the power to declare government actions unconstitutional. This power of judicial review is now considered an essential feature of the Supreme Court's role in the constitutional system of government.
The historical record suggests that those who framed and ratified the Constitution were aware of the concept of judicial review, and some favoured granting courts this power. Alexander Hamilton, for example, argued in favour of judicial review in the Federalist Papers. In the Judiciary Act of 1789, Congress explicitly provided for the exercise of judicial power and chose to leave the enforcement of claims under the Constitution and federal laws to state courts. This Act also created a Supreme Court with six justices and established the lower federal court system.
Despite the absence of an express grant of judicial review in the Constitution, the Supreme Court has asserted its power to conduct judicial review in landmark cases such as Marbury v. Madison (1803) and Martin v. Hunter's Lessee (1816). In Marbury v. Madison, the Court established that an Act of Congress contrary to the Constitution could not stand, as the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. In Martin v. Hunter's Lessee, the Court held that it had appellate jurisdiction over all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States, whether filed in state or federal courts. These decisions solidified the power of judicial review as a cornerstone of constitutional law.
Intent Letters: Contract or Not?
You may want to see also
The Supreme Court's role in judicial review
The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States and is the court of last resort for those seeking justice. It plays a crucial role in the country's constitutional system of government. Notably, the Supreme Court's power of judicial review is pivotal in ensuring that each branch of the government respects the limits of its authority.
Article III, Section I of the Constitution establishes the federal judiciary, stating that "The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." This section vests the Supreme Court with judicial power but allows Congress to decide on its organisation. Congress first exercised this power in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which created a Supreme Court with six justices and established the lower federal court system.
While the Constitution itself does not expressly grant federal courts the power to declare government actions unconstitutional, the Supreme Court's power of judicial review has been established through landmark cases such as Marbury v. Madison in 1803. In this case, the Court had to decide whether an Act of Congress or the Constitution took precedence as the supreme law of the land. The Court determined that it had the authority to review acts of Congress and declare them unconstitutional if they contradicted the Constitution.
Wide-Tooth Comb: What Width for Beard Combs?
You may want to see also
The Judiciary Act of 1789
The Act gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction, as provided for in the Constitution, and appellate jurisdiction in cases from the federal circuit courts and state courts where federal claims had been rejected. It also included the Alien Tort Statute, providing jurisdiction to district courts over lawsuits by aliens for torts in violation of treaties or international law.
Understanding Privileged Positions in the Constitution
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Marshall Court's interpretation
The case of Marbury v. Madison provided an opportunity for Marshall to expound on the principle of judicial review and secure the Supreme Court's primary role in interpreting the Constitution. The case centred on a "midnight appointment" by outgoing President John Adams, who appointed William Marbury as a judge, which was blocked by the incoming Jefferson administration. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to compel James Madison, Jefferson's Secretary of State, to deliver the commission.
Marshall's interpretation of judicial review in this case was significant. He recognised that the Court had to decide between upholding an Act of Congress or the Constitution. Marshall held that the Judiciary Act of 1789, which gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, was unconstitutional because it conflicted with the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land. This interpretation established the Court's power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional, even though this power is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution.
The Marshall Court's view of judicial review also faced opposition. Some, like Mr. Mercer, disapproved of the idea that judges could declare laws void, arguing that laws should be carefully made and then uncontrollable. However, the Marshall Court's interpretation has endured and become a cornerstone of US constitutional law, with the Supreme Court serving as the final arbiter of constitutional interpretation and guardian of civil rights and liberties.
US Budget Breakdown: Where Does the Money Go?
You may want to see also
The Separation of Powers doctrine
The legislative branch, comprised of Congress, is responsible for creating and passing laws. This branch holds the power to propose legislation, amend it, and ultimately enact it. The executive branch, led by the President, is tasked with executing and enforcing the laws created by the legislative branch. This includes signing bills into law, administering government agencies, and exercising diplomatic powers. Meanwhile, the judicial branch, with the Supreme Court at its apex, interprets the laws and ensures they align with the Constitution. This branch has the authority to review the actions of the other two branches, ensuring they act within the boundaries set by the Constitution.
The doctrine of Separation of Powers is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, but its principles are inherently woven into the structure of the government it establishes. The Constitution divides the powers of the federal government among the three branches, creating a system of distributed authority. This design was influenced by the framers' experiences under the British monarchy, where the concentration of power in a single entity, the King, led to abuses and infringements on individual liberties.
The judicial branch, in particular, plays a crucial role in maintaining the balance of power. While the Supreme Court is the final arbiter of constitutionality, interpreting the laws and ensuring they adhere to the Constitution, it must be careful not to overstep its bounds and respect the roles of the other branches. This dynamic is evident in the concept of judicial review, where the Supreme Court can declare a law or executive action unconstitutional, but it does not have the power to invalidate a law itself. The court's interpretation of the law guides the other branches in their actions, but it does not directly create or amend laws, respecting the separation of powers.
The Supreme Court's Constitutional Role Explained
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Judicial review is the idea that the actions of the executive and legislative branches of government are subject to review and possible invalidation by the judiciary. It allows the Supreme Court to take an active role in ensuring that the other branches of government abide by the Constitution.
The text of the Constitution does not contain a specific provision for the power of judicial review. Rather, the power to declare laws unconstitutional has been deemed an implied power, derived from Article III and Article VI of the US Constitution.
The Supreme Court can declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution. It plays an essential role in ensuring that each branch of government recognizes the limits of its own power.
The power of judicial review was established in the landmark decision of Marbury v. Madison, the first Supreme Court decision to strike down an act of Congress as unconstitutional.
Article III, Section II of the Constitution establishes the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Court has original jurisdiction over certain cases, such as suits between two or more states and cases involving ambassadors. The Court also has appellate jurisdiction on almost any other case that involves a point of constitutional and/or federal law.
