How has this constitutional principle been applied throughout our history?
Example One:
Judicial review is used all through out America, whether it is small claims and or large tyrannous court cases. A great example of this was the the water-gate scandal. The water gate scandal was when president Nixon got caught between a rock and a hard place. He was accused of rigging his reelection by having five burglars break into the Democratic National Committee offices inside the Watergate Office complex in hopes of planting hidden microphones otherwise known as "bugs". He then later resigned his presidency instead of becoming impeached.
This example shows the American people that the president is not above the law nor the Constitution. This courageous act by the courts is what judicial review is all about. It does not matter what title you have or how powerful you are, the law must be applied fairly to everyone. Our Founding Fathers believed in this principle, which they adopted from English common law, without actually labeling it as judicial review.
This example shows the American people that the president is not above the law nor the Constitution. This courageous act by the courts is what judicial review is all about. It does not matter what title you have or how powerful you are, the law must be applied fairly to everyone. Our Founding Fathers believed in this principle, which they adopted from English common law, without actually labeling it as judicial review.
Example Two:
Back in 1976, there was a man named Alan Bakke who applied to several medical schools in the hopes of one day becoming a doctor. Bakke was denied by all of the schools he applied to, but the University of California it Davis invigorated him to apply again. The adjacent year Bakke applied and was again rejected. Bakke then found out that the University's affirmative action program reserved 17 places for minority candidates insensitive of qualifications. Bakke sued the University declaring that he was the victim of "reverse discrimination." The university argued that the institution of quotas was needed to entrench minority admission to college under their affirmative action program.
After immense debate between courts, they demanded that Alan Bakke be promptly enrolled into medical school and that he was in fact discriminated against. This is why we have judicial review, to protect our people from any circumstances. Just because people are human and have natural rights, doesn't mean that will treat others with those unalienable rights. People should not be contradistinguished against just because of their ethnicity and or any other reason.
After immense debate between courts, they demanded that Alan Bakke be promptly enrolled into medical school and that he was in fact discriminated against. This is why we have judicial review, to protect our people from any circumstances. Just because people are human and have natural rights, doesn't mean that will treat others with those unalienable rights. People should not be contradistinguished against just because of their ethnicity and or any other reason.