This paper examines the judicial review concept in eight pages with writ of certiorari and Marbury v. Madison among the relevant topics discussed. Four sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: D0_JGAjdrev.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
week prior; such gatherings are impenetrable to either reporters or the idle curious. The point at which all discussion and opinions have been presented, it is the duty of
the chief justice to delegate to another justice the duty of voicing the majority decision. Additional issues addressed at the closed-door meetings include the granting or declining of Cert
Petitions, in which case a denial can be overruled by the opposition of only four justices. All of the final decisions made in this meeting are typically announced on
the following Monday; however, not all issues are settled every time, in which case if there are still unresolved issues that remain at the end of the term, they are
then moved forward for further contemplation during the next term. Inasmuch as the Supreme Court of the United States is the last stop on the judicial trail, the decisions its
judges render are both binding and final. Indeed, the litigant must understand from the outset that whatever decision made by the Supreme Court is the last word on the
case -- in effect, it is the end of the legal road for those who are not satisfied with lower court judgments. There are a number of instances where
the Supreme Court bases its final decision upon the precedence that was set by the preceding case, not being likely to alter the course of direction already set in motion
unless there is a significant reason presented to do so. Typically, however, it is the lower court that must abide by the precedence set by the higher courts (McWhirter
1994). There are few occasions when the Supreme Court will depart from the standing decision as set down by the preceding case, primarily because there is only one issue