...legislature in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar...by the judges as, a fundamental law. It therefore belong* to them to ascertain its meaning ....*); Marbury v. Madison. 5 US (1 Cranch) 137, 177 (1803)....

...legislature in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority. The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar...and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental lav. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning ...."); Marburv v. Madison. 5 US (1 Cranch)...

...question must be asked since it is precisely on this point that the power of judicial review is based: "The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts" (Federalist No. 78). The same problem arises in Wilson's discussion of particular principles of interpretation....

...Judiciary to interpret the law. The Federalist No. 78, at 467 (A Hamilton) (C. Rossiter ed. 1961). (The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts.") More recently, the United States Supreme Court has made clear that, "under the Constitution, one of...

...nothing."70 The courts, Hamilton urged, were designed to keep the legislature within constitutional limits. "The interpretation of the laws is the proper and...be regarded by the judges as a fundamental law. It must therefore belong to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act...

...Federalist No. 78, at 492 (Alexander Hamilton) (Benjamin F. Wright, ed. 1974) ("The interpretation of law is the proper and peculiar province of the courts....constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by judges, as fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning. . . ."). I have...

...legislature, in order, among other things, to keep the latter within the limits assigned to their authority." The "interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts", and a "constitution is in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as a fundamental law." This does...

...faction may poison the fountains of justice" (483-84). In Federalist 78, Publius is content to note that "the interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts." Thus, because the Constitution "is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law,"...

...widespread belief that it would be applied by the judges.16 In Federalist No. 78, Hamilton insisted that the Constitution "is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law,"17 and Marbury v. Madison emphasized precisely the same point. 18 Only after it was assumed that...

...onwards): see Hamilton in The Federalist Papers, ed. Clinton Rossiter (New York, 1961), no. 78, p. 467: 'A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges as, a fundamental law.' 37. Perhaps these remarks do something to clarify the question of the anachronism of the concept of...