Judicial Review

Paper Summary:

The paper examine the origins and evolution of judicial review through an analysis of controlling legislation and a discussion of what happens when a law is struck down as unconstitutional. The paper assesses what alternatives are available to the executive and legislative branches once the judicial branch has exercised judicial review. The paper shows how the concept of judicial review, even though it is not specifically explicated in the Constitution, remains a fundamental component of the American legislative process.

Outline:
Introduction
Review and Discussion
Conclusion

From the Paper:

"This is the process by which laws are enacted in the U.S. Although the legislative and executive branches of the federal government enjoy the constitutional right to propose and enact legislation for a wide variety of purposes, such legislation must "pass constitutional muster" in order for it to be effective and the Supreme Court has assumed this responsibility. In this regard, Treaner (2005) reports that, "The Supreme Court has claimed originalist sanction for the view that it is 'the ultimate expositor of the constitutional text,' and in the past decade has struck down a string of congressional statutes on originalist grounds" (455)."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Black's Law Dictionary. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing Co., 1990.
• Marcus, Maeva. Origins of the Federal Judiciary: Essays on the Judiciary Act of 1789. New York: Oxford, 1992.
• Raskin, Jamin B. Overruling Democracy: The Supreme Court vs. the American People. New York: Routledge, 2003.
• Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989).
• Treanor, William Michael. (2005). "Judicial Review before Marbury." Stanford Law Review 58(2): 455.

More papers on Judicial Review:

• Term Paper # 32717 : "The Judicial Review and the Charter"
• Term Paper # 127058 : "John Marshall and Judicial Review"
• Analytical Essay # 126594 : "John Marshall and Judicial Review"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: