Judicial review is the power given to the supreme court in order to maintain the checks and balances between the three branches of government if thought by the supreme court that the legislative or executive branch is acting unlawfully or against the constitution.
“judicial review The power of the Supreme Court to review and adjudicate the constitutionality of legislative and executive acts.”(Ivers 2013)
In the Marbury vs. Madison case it seemed as though Justice Marshall interpreted the constitution to favor the supreme court in that it broadened their jurisdiction and gave them the last say when it comes to the constitution and the law. It doesn’t seem as though this is what the framers had in mind when it came to checks and balances. It seems as though the supreme court has a final say or more reach then they should. This comes into question in such cases as abortion.
“Article III of the Constitution—was the implied power of judicial review, or the Court’s power to determine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. Judicial review remains controversial for this reason alone. However, the Court’s use of judicial review to advance dramatic new concepts of government power and individual rights, often in the face of popular opposition, has generated additional controversy.”(Ivers 2013)
So the controversy lies in the fact that although a majority of the people feel something is lawful or constitutional the Supreme Court may decide otherwise. It seems like a more fair practice would require 2 the 3 branches of government should be required to make final decisions against the other one. This would create a more fair and balanced system. It seems that by changing certain laws the supreme court has given itself more power then it was intended to have which has had negative ramifications.
Ivers, G. (2013). Constitutional law: An introduction. [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/