Over the decades, the Supreme Court has exercised its power of judicial review in overturning hundreds of lower court cases. The following are just a few examples of such landmark cases: Roe v. The Court held that a woman’s right to an abortion fell within the right to privacy as protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.

It can be said that the judiciary is the least democratic branch of government. In many respects the Supreme Court is not a democratic institution. Its members are not elected, for all practical purposes the justices serve for life, and they are not held directly accountable for their actions.

The best-known power of the Supreme Court is judicial review, or the ability of the Court to declare a Legislative or Executive act in violation of the Constitution, is not found within the text of the Constitution itself. The Court established this doctrine in the case of Marbury v. Madison (1803).

Following oral arguments, the Court called for reargument of the case on the basis of new questions, because it foresaw that a correct ruling on the questions originally presented would have left the provisions in place and frustrated its conviction that “this corporation [Citizens United] has a constitutional right to …

United States examples

• Brown v. Board of Education – 1954 Supreme Court ruling ordering the desegregation of public schools.
• Roe v. Wade – 1973 Supreme Court ruling creating the constitutional right to an abortion.
• Bush v.
• Citizens United v.
• Hollingsworth v.
• Obergefell v.
• Janus v.
• Department of Homeland Security v.

Both kinds of Court will sometimes be controversial, and both will make mistakes. But history teaches us that the cases in which a deferential Court fails to invalidate governmental acts are worse. Only a Court inclined toward activism will vigilantly avoid such cases, and hence we need more judicial activism.

Judicial Activism means the rulings of the court based on political and personal rational and prudence of the Judges presiding over the issue. It is a legal term referring to court rulings based, in part or in full, on the political or personal factors of the Judge, rather than current or existing legislation.

Overall while there may be 6 weeks in planning cases and up to three months in non-planning law cases to take action, you cannot be dilatory or look as though you are acquiescing in a decision. It is worth considering action as soon as you possibly can. In statutory appeals cases the time is fixed at six weeks.

Judicial review is a kind of court case, in which someone (the “claimant”) challenges the lawfulness of a government decision. If the claimant wins, then the government decision can be declared unlawful, or quashed. That will sometimes mean that the decision has to be made again.