TheSupreme Court has a unique responsibility to perform in the USstructure of government. It offers checks and stabilities to theother divisions of the government. The Supreme Court makes sure thatnone of the departments of the government has more powers than theother divisions at one particular time. It has the mandate to stopthe presidents’ actions in case his actions are contrary to thelaws of the land (Ray, 2016).The court also has powers of confrontingthe Congress and inhibiting the operation of a law passed in case itinfringes the United States Constitution. However, the Supreme Courtis restricted by the other two divisions of the government andconstitutional restrictions.
Ajudicial review is a court’s mandate to scrutinize a legislative oran executive Act and nullify the Act in case it contradicts thevalues of the United States Constitution. This can be furtherexplained by a case in the 1800s Marbury v. Madison (Ray, 2016).Federalist John Adams selected a huge number of integrities of peacefor the District of Columbia whose directives were sanctioned by theSenate, signed by the head of states, and attached with the certifiedstamp of the federal government. The president did all this in thelast days of the presidency term. The directives were distributed,nonetheless, when President Jefferson presumed office, he commandedMadison not to distribute them. Marbury one the people selected butnever received the directive appealed to the Supreme Court for aninjunction of mandamus, or legal command, forcing Madison to showcasethe reason he could not be allowed get the directive.
ChiefJustice Marshall was mandated to handle the case. The Chief Justicehad to provide solutions to some complicated question beforeproviding the verdict. He had to evaluate whether Marbury had theright to the injunction for which he appealed and verify whether theConstitution of the United States allowed the courts to give Marburysuch an injunction (Ray, 2016). Additionally, he had to verify that,if indeed the constitution did allow such an injunction, could theSupreme Court give such an injunction? After providing solutions tothe questions, Marshall adjudged that the court could not give theinjunction because the Judiciary Act, which gave it the mandate to doso, was unlawful in that it stretched to concerns of the originaldominion. This is the way judicial review came into existence
Therehas recently been a ruling on the same-sex marriage issues. Beforethe ruling, gays could only marry in some states of the US. However,central petitions courts had not tallied on whether states shouldpermit gays to marry and identify similar marriages done in anotherplace. In the past years, the Supreme Court has stretched the rightsof same-sex American citizens. The Obama government backed up gaymarriages by challenging laws that prohibited it. This judgmentconcluded that it was unconstitutional to prohibit gay marriages.
Attimes, the court can be seen as mishandling the authority of thejudicial review, relying on the case that is being adjudged. In acase, like the one stated above, the court did not mishandle itsauthority, but in other cases, the court may adjudge an issue that isnot clear and devoid of definite verdicts that can be reached.
Ray,C. (2016). John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, and the Construction ofConstitutional Legitimacy. Law, Culture and the Humanities,1743872116650867.