Judicial Review Pros And Cons

Words: 587
Pages: 3

Today the Supreme Court has the ability to declare any law unconstitutional if it infringes the values set by the Constitution but it had not always like this. Up until the early 1800's the United States had gone without the idea of judicial review; judicial review is the ability for a court to annul a law for infringing upon a higher power. Prior to judicial review being put in place it was used but rarely, and mostly on the state level. Judicial review had not been explicitly stated in the Constitution although some argue it had been implied in it that is why the country had gone a number of years without . Judicial review lived in limbo it was unknown if it was insinuated or even legal. Nevertheless the idea of juridical review did exist it was just the Marbury v. Madison case that had made it a more wide spread, accepted, idea. After the opening the door to declare laws unconstitutional numerous cases using it followed. Two prominent examples of judicial review being used are the, Brown v. …show more content…
Ferguson, judicial review was put into affect with nothing but good intentions in mind. Judicial review preserves the original ideas of the founding fathers by making sure that laws that deviate from the Constitution can be all be thrown out in an instant. Limited government still exists today because of stoppers like judicial review that prevent the government from becoming all powerful. To conclude, two examples of judicial review being reinforced is Brown v. Board of Education and Obergefell v. Hodges. Both cases decided that laws of segregation and laws that prohibited gay marriage were unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment through the use of judicial review of the Constitution. Judicial review protects against the legislative or executive branch breaching the Constitution, preserving the original intentions of the founding