Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardConstitutional Foundations of the Judiciary and Judicial Review

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton argued:

'If it be said that the legislative body are themselves the constitutional judges of their own powers, and that the construction they put upon them is conclusive upon the other departments... this cannot be the natural presumption... The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts.'

Which of the following best describes how the Supreme Court's ruling in Marbury v. Madison (1803) resolved the tension described in Hamilton's argument?

  1. A
    It formally amended Article III of the Constitution to grant the federal courts the explicit, written power of judicial review, resolving the lack of particular provisions in the original text.
  2. B
    It established a mechanism requiring the executive branch to approve all Supreme Court decisions before they can invalidate congressional statutes, strengthening the system of checks and balances.
  3. It established that the federal judiciary has the power to declare acts of Congress void when they conflict with the Constitution, ensuring that the legislature does not serve as the final judge of its own constitutional authority.Answer
  4. D
    It applied the principles of Federalist No. 51 by granting the Supreme Court the authority to redraft legislation that it deems to be outside the constitutional authority of Congress.

Answer

The Supreme Court's ruling in Marbury v. Madison resolved the tension by establishing that the federal judiciary has the power to declare acts of Congress void when they conflict with the Constitution, ensuring that the legislature does not serve as the final judge of its own constitutional authority.
The correct answer is the option stating that the Court established the power of the federal judiciary to declare acts of Congress void when they conflict with the Constitution. In Marbury v. Madison (1803), Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that an act of the legislature contrary to the Constitution is void. This directly aligns with Hamilton's argument in Federalist No. 78 that the legislature cannot be the sole judge of its own power, and that the judiciary must act as an intermediary to keep the legislature within its limits.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Hamilton's argument in Federalist No. 78.
Hamilton asserts that Congress cannot be the final judge of its own constitutional powers and that interpreting the Constitution to limit legislative overreach is the proper function of the courts.
Understanding Hamilton's argument is necessary to identify the specific institutional tension between the legislature and the judiciary.
2
Connect the argument to the holding of Marbury v. Madison (1803).
Chief Justice John Marshall established the doctrine of judicial review, declaring that the Supreme Court has the authority to void acts of Congress that violate the Constitution.
This establishes the historical mechanism that resolved the tension described by Hamilton.
3
Evaluate the options to find the one that accurately describes this constitutional link.
The correct option correctly describes the power of judicial review to invalidate unconstitutional acts without introducing misconceptions about formal constitutional amendments or legislative roles for the court.
This isolates the correct answer while rejecting distractors that distort the separation of powers or the nature of constitutional amendments.

Key Concept

Constitutional Foundations of the Judiciary and Judicial Review
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Constitutional Foundations of the Judiciary and Judicial Review

More questions from this topic