Editor's Choice
What did Marshall mean by "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is"?
Quick answer:
Marshall's statement emphasizes the role of the judiciary in interpreting the law, a principle established in the Marbury v. Madison case, which introduced judicial review. This means courts have the authority to invalidate laws that contradict the Constitution, ensuring laws align with constitutional rights. Marshall asserted that when laws conflict, it is the judiciary's duty to determine their validity, highlighting the judiciary's crucial role in maintaining constitutional integrity.
In the Marbury v. Madison Supreme Court Case, the concept of judicial review was firmly established. Judicial review is the idea that the courts can rule a law that has been passed by a legislative body as invalid. This ruling is made on the basis of Constitutional law. In other words, if a law is passed that violates the Constitutional rights of citizens, it can be overruled by the courts. The Supreme Court has the authority to ultimately make this decision.
The concept of judicial review is often criticized by political analysts as "ruling from the bench" or in giving the judicial branch too much authority. The statement of Chief Justice John Marshall that is referenced in the statement above seems to confirm these fears. What Marshall meant is that when two laws seem to contradict one another, it is the duty and responsibility of the courts to decide which law should be valid. This is especially true if the law in question is in contradiction to the United States Constitution.
Get Ahead with eNotes
Start your 48-hour free trial to access everything you need to rise to the top of the class. Enjoy expert answers and study guides ad-free and take your learning to the next level.
Already a member? Log in here.