Judicial Review in AP Government the courts as constitutional referee.
Judicial review is the power of courts to strike down laws and actions that conflict with the Constitution. This judicial review AP Gov definition guide covers its origin in Marbury v. Madison and how the AP exam tests it.
What is judicial review?
Judicial review is the power of the federal courts to declare a law or executive action unconstitutional and therefore void. It makes the judiciary a check on the other two branches. The Constitution does not state this power directly, so the Supreme Court established it.
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
Chief Justice John Marshall set the precedent in Marbury v. Madison. The Court ruled that part of the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted with the Constitution and could not stand. By striking down an act of Congress, the Court claimed the authority to interpret the Constitution as the final word. This 1803 case is the single most important fact for any judicial review question.
Why it matters for the branches
Activism versus restraint
Judicial activism describes a willingness to overturn laws and set broad new policy. Judicial restraint favors deference to the elected branches and to precedent unless a law clearly violates the Constitution. The AP exam may ask you to label an approach or to weigh judicial review against majority rule, since unelected judges can overrule elected officials.
How AP Gov tests judicial review
Expect questions tying judicial review to Marbury v. Madison and to the separation of powers. Free-response questions may ask how judicial review checks the other branches or how the other branches limit the Court in return. Always anchor the answer to the 1803 precedent.
Frequently asked questions
Quick answers — written by humans, not a chatbot.
Where does the power of judicial review come from?
It is not written in the Constitution. The Supreme Court established it in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, when Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the Court could declare an act of Congress unconstitutional.
How can the other branches limit judicial review?
Congress can pass new legislation, propose a constitutional amendment, or change the number of justices, and the president nominates justices with Senate approval. These tools keep the Court from being completely unchecked.
What is the difference between judicial activism and judicial restraint?
Judicial activism is a readiness to strike down laws and shape policy. Judicial restraint is deference to the elected branches and to precedent unless a law clearly breaks the Constitution.