State courts have the authority to review the constitutionality of state laws and actions to ensure they comply with the state constitution and the U.S. Constitution.

The principle of judicial review is based on the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, which establishes that federal law is the supreme law of the land and state laws must conform to it.

The landmark case of Marbury v. Madison (1803) established the principle of judicial review in the United States, asserting the power of the Supreme Court to declare laws unconstitutional.

The doctrine of judicial review originated in the Massachusetts court system, where Chief Justice John Marshall served as the first Chief Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.

The standing requirement in state court judicial review varies depending on the specific case and jurisdiction, and courts may consider factors such as the nature of the injury, the causal connection between the injury and the challenged law, and the plaintiff's interest in the outcome.

State courts primarily use declaratory judgments to review the constitutionality of laws. A declaratory judgment is a court order that declares the rights and obligations of the parties in a case without ordering any specific action.

State courts have the authority to review both state and federal laws to determine their constitutionality.

State courts may defer to legislative enactments in certain circumstances, such as when the law involves complex policy issues or when the legislature has particular expertise in the subject matter.

The primary limitation on the power of judicial review in state courts is the political question doctrine, which prevents courts from adjudicating certain disputes that are considered to be inherently political in nature.

The purpose of the mootness doctrine is to prevent courts from deciding cases that have already been resolved or that are no longer capable of being affected by a court decision.

The purpose of the ripeness doctrine is to prevent courts from deciding cases that are not ripe for review, meaning that the issues in the case are not yet sufficiently developed or concrete for a court to make a meaningful decision.

State courts have the authority to issue both declaratory judgments and injunctions as remedies in judicial review cases.

State court decisions are not binding on federal courts or other state courts, but they can be persuasive authority and may influence the decisions of other courts.

State courts face a variety of challenges in exercising judicial review, including lack of resources, political pressure, and limited jurisdiction.

Judicial review by state courts contributes to the overall system of checks and balances in the United States by ensuring that laws comply with the state constitution, the U.S. Constitution, and by preventing the accumulation of power in any one branch of government.