Cases. Constitutional review was created by a judicial decision, Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803). The Constitution provides no explicit enumerated power for the courts to review the constitutionality of a law. That's your standard, isn't it?
We have no power per se to review and annul acts of Congress on the ground that they are unconstitutional. That question may be considered only when the justification for some direct injury suffered or threatened, presenting a justiciable issue, is made to rest upon such an act. Then the power exercised is that of ascertaining and declaring the law applicable to the controversy. It amounts to little more than the negative power to disregard an unconstitutional enactment, which otherwise would stand in the way of the enforcement of a legal right. The party who invokes the power must be able to show, not only that the statute is invalid, but that he has sustained or is immediately in danger of sustaining some direct injury as the result of its enforcement, and not merely that he suffers in some indefinite way in common with people generally. If a case for preventive relief be presented, the court enjoins, in effect, not the execution of the statute, but the acts of the official, the statute notwithstanding.
I'm no lawyer but it appears to me that the case was brought before the court by an injured party, the Commonwealth of Virginia vs The United States. The United States was a party to the suit. The Commonwealth had standing, the federal court had jurisdiction, heard the case, found the law unconstitutional and ruled in favor of the Commonwealth. The constitution was followed, the ruling is constitutionally sound. If you don't like it, you can KMA!
No, idiot. Suit was brought before the court by the injured party. The federal court had jurisdiction. The injured party had standing. The court heard the case and ruled in favor of the injured party. Obama’s tyrannical healthcare act is ruled unconstitutional and if you don’t like it, tough!