The case of Marbury v Madison (1803) established judicial review which allowed the Supreme Court to proclaim that acts of Congress are unconstitutional even though the review itself is not a part of the Constitution (Haas 2014). Though the petition to give Madison a writ of mandamus was ultimately thrown out, this landmark ruling would affect other Court cases for the next two hundred years as the Supreme Court would continuously extend their influence. Take the case of Martin v Hunter Lessee (1806) where the Court decided that it could “review state court civil cases, if they arise under federal or constitutional law” (Haas 2014). This case was only three years after the Marbury v Madison case already increased the Court’s influence and yet here they are utilizing judicial review again just to give them more control instead of using it to make sure Congress wasn’t doing anything unconstitutional.
This would happen again in 1954 during the Brown v Board of Education case where the Supreme Court used judicial review as an excuse so that they could decide whether or not schools should be segregated (Haas 2014). In this particular situation, however, they acted in defense of people’s rights instead of just to increase their own power. They would do this in the Gideon v Wainwright (1963) as well as they ruled that the defendant had to have a counsel to represent him (Haas 2014). Thus it can be said that the Marbury ruling led to the Court being able to further help while it also allowed them to extend their influence which can have negative effects as well especially when they abuse judicial review to further their own means.
Work Cited
Haas, Stephen. "Judicial Review." National Paralegal. National Juris University, 2014. Web. 01 July 2016.
