Judicial Review

Legislative Review

Executive Review

Constitutional Review

Marbury v. Madison

McCulloch v. Maryland

Gibbons v. Ogden

Fletcher v. Peck

John Marshall

Oliver Ellsworth

William Cushing

Samuel Chase

The constitutionality of the Judiciary Act of 1789

The constitutionality of the Alien and Sedition Acts

The constitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase

The constitutionality of the Embargo Act of 1807

That the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional

That the Alien and Sedition Acts were unconstitutional

That the Louisiana Purchase was unconstitutional

That the Embargo Act of 1807 was unconstitutional

The doctrine of precedent

The doctrine of judicial review

The doctrine of constitutional interpretation

The doctrine of separation of powers

It requires courts to follow the precedents of higher courts

It requires courts to follow the precedents of lower courts

It requires courts to follow the precedents of other courts in the same jurisdiction

It requires courts to follow the precedents of courts in other jurisdictions

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while legislative review is the power of the legislature to declare judicial decisions unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while legislative review is the power of the legislature to declare executive acts unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while legislative review is the power of the legislature to declare judicial decisions unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while legislative review is the power of the legislature to declare executive acts unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while executive review is the power of the executive to declare legislative or judicial acts unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while executive review is the power of the executive to declare legislative acts unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while executive review is the power of the executive to declare judicial acts unconstitutional

Judicial review is the power of the courts to declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional, while executive review is the power of the executive to declare legislative or judicial acts unconstitutional

The courts can only declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional if they are in violation of the Constitution

The courts can only declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional if they are in violation of the Constitution or a statute

The courts can only declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional if they are in violation of the Constitution, a statute, or a treaty

The courts can only declare legislative or executive acts unconstitutional if they are in violation of the Constitution, a statute, a treaty, or a regulation

The legislative or executive act that is declared unconstitutional is void

The legislative or executive act that is declared unconstitutional is void and the courts can issue an injunction to prevent its enforcement

The legislative or executive act that is declared unconstitutional is void and the courts can issue a writ of mandamus to compel the government to take action

The legislative or executive act that is declared unconstitutional is void and the courts can issue a writ of prohibition to prevent the government from taking action

A writ of mandamus compels the government to take action, while a writ of prohibition prevents the government from taking action

A writ of mandamus prevents the government from taking action, while a writ of prohibition compels the government to take action

A writ of mandamus compels the government to take action, while a writ of prohibition prevents the government from taking action

A writ of mandamus prevents the government from taking action, while a writ of prohibition compels the government to take action

A writ of certiorari is used to review a decision of a lower court, while a writ of error is used to review a decision of a higher court

A writ of certiorari is used to review a decision of a higher court, while a writ of error is used to review a decision of a lower court

A writ of certiorari is used to review a decision of a lower court, while a writ of error is used to review a decision of a higher court

A writ of certiorari is used to review a decision of a higher court, while a writ of error is used to review a decision of a lower court

A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the legality of a person's detention, while a writ of amparo is used to challenge the constitutionality of a law

A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the constitutionality of a law, while a writ of amparo is used to challenge the legality of a person's detention

A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the legality of a person's detention, while a writ of amparo is used to challenge the constitutionality of a law

A writ of habeas corpus is used to challenge the constitutionality of a law, while a writ of amparo is used to challenge the legality of a person's detention