The primary challenge to judicial review is the lack of democratic legitimacy of judges. Judges are not elected by the people, and therefore they do not have the same democratic mandate as elected officials.

Judicial activism is when judges make decisions based on their personal beliefs rather than the law. This can be a problem because it can lead to decisions that are not fair or just.

The difficulty in enforcing judicial decisions is due to a combination of factors, including the lack of resources available to the courts, the lack of cooperation from other branches of government, and the lack of public support for judicial decisions.

The cost of judicial review includes the cost of litigation, the cost of enforcing judicial decisions, and the cost of judicial salaries.

The arguments in favor of judicial review include the fact that it ensures that the government acts within the limits of the Constitution, it protects the rights of individuals, and it promotes the rule of law.

The arguments against judicial review include the fact that it is undemocratic, it can lead to judicial activism, and it is too expensive.

Judicial review can be challenged by amending the Constitution, by passing legislation that limits the power of the courts, or by refusing to enforce judicial decisions.

The future of judicial review is impossible to say. It is possible that it will become more powerful, less powerful, or remain the same.

The most important challenge to judicial review today is the lack of public support for judicial review. This is due to a number of factors, including the perception that judges are too powerful, that judicial review is undemocratic, and that judicial review is too expensive.

The challenges to judicial review can be addressed by educating the public about the importance of judicial review, reforming the judicial system to make it more efficient and less expensive, and amending the Constitution to limit the power of the courts.