Judicial review

judicial oversightreviewjudicially reviewedstruck downjudicially reviewactionadministrative actionschallenged in courtchallengingconstitutional review
Judicial review is a process under which executive or legislative actions are subject to review by the judiciary.wikipedia
1,003 Related Articles

Marbury v. Madison

Marbury v Madisonjudicial precedentjudicial review
In contrast to legislative supremacy, the idea of separation of powers was first introduced by Montesquieu; it was later institutionalized in the United States by the Supreme Court ruling in Marbury v. Madison under the court of John Marshall.
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a U.S. Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws, statutes, and some government actions that violate the Constitution of the United States.

Constitution

constitutionalconstitutionsconstitutional government
A court with authority for judicial review may invalidate laws, acts and governmental actions that are incompatible with a higher authority: an executive decision may be invalidated for being unlawful or a statute may be invalidated for violating the terms of a constitution.
Action that appears to be beyond power may be judicially reviewed and, if found to be beyond power, must cease.

Judiciary

judicialjudicial branchjudicial system
Judicial review is a process under which executive or legislative actions are subject to review by the judiciary.
In many jurisdictions the judicial branch has the power to change laws through the process of judicial review.

John Marshall

Chief Justice MarshallMarshallChief Justice John Marshall
In contrast to legislative supremacy, the idea of separation of powers was first introduced by Montesquieu; it was later institutionalized in the United States by the Supreme Court ruling in Marbury v. Madison under the court of John Marshall.
In his opinion for the court, Marshall upheld the principle of judicial review, whereby courts could strike down federal and state laws if they conflicted with the Constitution.

Supreme Court of the United States

United States Supreme CourtU.S. Supreme CourtSupreme Court
In American legal language, "judicial review" refers primarily to the adjudication of constitutionality of statutes, especially by the Supreme Court of the United States.
The Court holds the power of judicial review, the ability to invalidate a statute for violating a provision of the U.S. Constitution.

Parliamentary sovereignty

parliamentary supremacylegislative supremacysovereignty of Parliament
In the United Kingdom, Acts of Parliament cannot be set aside under the doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, whereas Orders in Council, another type of primary legislation not passed by Parliament, can (see Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service (1985) and Miller/Cherry (2019)).
In some countries, parliamentary sovereignty may be contrasted with separation of powers, which limits the legislature's scope often to general law-making, and judicial review, where laws passed by the legislature may be declared invalid in certain circumstances.

Constitutionality

unconstitutionalconstitutionalunconstitutionally
In the United States, federal and state courts (at all levels, both appellate and trial) are able to review and declare the "constitutionality", or agreement with the Constitution (or lack thereof) of legislation by a process of judicial interpretation that is relevant to any case properly within their jurisdiction.
All the rest are considered constitutional until challenged and declared otherwise, typically by courts through judicial review.

Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic

Constitutional CourtCzech Constitutional courtConstitutional Courts
In 1920, Czechoslovakia adopted a system of judicial review by a specialized court, the Constitutional Court as written by Hans Kelsen, a leading jurist of the time.
Although the Court itself was established only in 1993, its Czechoslovak predecessor was already provided for in the Constitution of 1920, making Czechoslovakia the first country in the world with a system of judicial review by a specialized court (although the court itself first convened after the Austrian one).

Judicial interpretation

constitutional interpretationinterpretationLegal interpretation
In the United States, federal and state courts (at all levels, both appellate and trial) are able to review and declare the "constitutionality", or agreement with the Constitution (or lack thereof) of legislation by a process of judicial interpretation that is relevant to any case properly within their jurisdiction.
This is an important issue in some common law jurisdictions such as the United States, Australia and Canada, because the supreme courts of those nations can overturn laws made by their legislatures via a process called judicial review.

Separation of powers

checks and balancesbranches of governmentdivision of powers
Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers: the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive branches when the latter exceed their authority.
The courts frequently exercise a power of judicial review of administrative actions and also decide matters of constitutionality of legislation, though this power is circumscribed under the power of the People's Republic of China's National People's Congress to make final determinations as to interpretation.

Due process

due process of lawDue Process Clausejudicial procedure
Separation of powers is based on the idea that no branch of government should be able to exert power over any other branch without due process of law; each branch of government should have a check on the powers of the other branches of government, thus creating a regulative balance among all branches of government.
Orth points out that this is generally attributed to the rise of the doctrine of parliamentary supremacy in the United Kingdom, which was accompanied by hostility towards judicial review as an undemocratic foreign invention.

Argentina

ArgentineARGArgentinian
The Judicial branch includes the Supreme Court and lower federal courts interpret laws and overturn those they find unconstitutional.

Angola

Republic of AngolaAngolanAO
A Supreme Court serves as the appellate tribunal; a Constitutional Court does not hold the powers of judicial review.

Germany

GermanGERFederal Republic of Germany
The Bundesverfassungsgericht (Federal Constitutional Court) is the German Supreme Court responsible for constitutional matters, with power of judicial review.

Australian administrative law

administrative lawAdministrative Review CouncilCommonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal
It is basically a common law system, with an increasing statutory overlay that has shifted its focus toward codified judicial review and to tribunals with extensive jurisdiction.

Judicial review in Bangladesh

judicial review
The term judicial review is not expressly used in Bangladeshi law, but Article 102 of the Constitution of Bangladesh allows writ petitions to be filed at the High Court Division for reviewing the actions of public authorities, or suspending proceedings in lower courts.

Moldova

Republic of MoldovaMDAMoldavian
The Court is invested with the power of judicial review over all acts of the parliament, over presidential decrees, and over international treaties, signed by the country.

Judicial review in Denmark

able to perform judicial review
Judicial review is the procedure by which courts in Denmark assess whether laws are compatible with the Constitution of Denmark, and administrative acts are compatible with the law.

Judicial review in Austria

judicial reviewAustrian system of judicial reviewreviewing
The European and Austrian constitutions endow the Austrian court system with broad powers of judicial review.

Judicial review in Hong Kong

judicial reviewreview
Judicial review in Hong Kong is conducted according to the Constitutional and Administrative Law List (Practice Direction 26.1).

Judicial review in Canada

judicial reviewjudicially reviewed
In Canada, judicial review is the process that allows courts to supervise administrative tribunals' exercise of their statutory powers.

Unconstitutional constitutional amendment

An unconstitutional constitutional amendment is a concept in judicial review based on the idea that even a properly passed and properly ratified constitutional amendment, one which is not explicitly prohibited by a constitution's text, can nevertheless be unconstitutional on substantive (as opposed to procedural) grounds—such as due to this amendment conflicting with some constitutional or even extra-constitutional norm, value, and/or principle.

Judicial review in the United States

judicial reviewstruck downreview
While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define a power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.

Judicial review in New Zealand

judicial reviewlegal challengeNew Zealand
Judicial review, under which executive actions of the Government are subject to review, and possible invalidation, is used in New Zealand.

Sweden

SwedishSWEKingdom of Sweden
The role of judicial review of legislation is not practised by the courts; instead, the Council on Legislation gives non-binding opinions on legality.