Your imagination is at work again, since Mr. Justice Marshall placed no such limits on the authority he claimed for the court.
I agree with Marshall & Scalia.
A bit tough to do, since they do not appear to agree with each other: Mr. Justice Marshall tended to expand the court's authority. As James Madison noted in 1821:
"It is to be regretted that [Marshall's] Court is so much in the practice of mingling with their judgments pronounced, comments & reasonings of a scope beyond them; and that there is often an apparent disposition to amplify the authorities of the Union at the expence of those of the States. It is of great importance as well as of indispensable obligation, that the constitutional boundary between them should be impartially maintained. Every deviation from it in practice detracts from the superiority of a Chartered over a traditional Govt... At the present date, [the court's] theoretic innovations at least are putting new weights into the scale of federal sovereignty which make it highly proper to bring them to the Bar of the Constitution."
To Mr. Madison's mind, Mr. Justice Marshall's court commonly issued "comments & reasonings of a scope beyond them," often apparently in attempts "to amplify" federal authority at the expense of the States - all of which was of doubtful constitutionality. (BTW - if that's not a description of the majority opinion in Roper v. Simmons, I don't know what is... ;>)
If you choose to agree with such a process, that is certainly your right...
;>)
As Mr. Justice Scalia has noted, the Constitution nowhere grants the high court the final and exclusive power of constitutional review (the power to 'say what the Constitution is').
Nor does Marshall. I agree with Marshall & Scalia. You're imagining that I do not. Silly you.
Your imagination is at work again, since Mr. Justice Marshall placed no such limits on the authority he claimed for the court.
You can't quote Marshall writing anything like that in Marbury.
I agree with Marshall & Scalia.
A bit tough to do, since they do not appear to agree with each other: Mr. Justice Marshall tended to expand the court's authority.
Marshall and Scalia agree, the Constitution nowhere grants the high court the final and exclusive power of constitutional review. -- Read Marbury for the proof as to Marshalls opinion.