Pros And Cons Of Judicial Review

589 Words3 Pages

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare acts of Congress to be in conflict with the Constitution. Judicial review is often seen as controversial and has contending views. Additionally, many people believe the founders would not approve use of the judicial review based on essays from 1788. In addition, many people respond to the Supreme Court’s use of the judicial review differently, such as the President views it differently than the average American citizen. And while judicial restraint and judicial activism appear to the same they are quite different from one another. Lastly, this all ties in with judicial review in understanding what exactly judicial review is. Firstly, judicial review is controversial because while the three …show more content…

As one articles states, “This system of checks and balances and the Constitution’s clear delineation of the powers of the federal government—few, limited, and defined, as Madison put it—would protect states’ rights and, as they saw it, individual rights.”, shows why the Founders would not approve. The Founders did not want to go back to an overbearing government. Because the judicial review has more power over the other branches of government, the Founders would disapprove of the judicial review. (History.com Staff, 2009). Additionally, people will respond to judicial review in different ways. An example is the President pushing for an act, such as the Affordable Care Act. As a nation, Americans reacted to that by complaining about it. They felt the President simply went with it rather than talking to the people about it. Congress reacts to judicial review by possibly overturning laws and rulings of cases that went to Supreme Court. The states react to judicial review by having their “own” rules, such as marijuana possession or the drinking age. People react to the judicial review by taking their case to Supreme Court if the feel they have an unfair

More about Pros And Cons Of Judicial Review