...emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who can apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. Id. at 73. Although the interpretation put forward by an agency should be considered, "the legal standard...

...that this logic entailed at the same time the obligation to make the comparison. As Marshall put it. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. So...

...emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who can apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. Id. at 73. Although the interpretation put forward by an agency should be considered, "the legal standard...

...that this logic entailed at the same time the oblioation to make the comparison. As Marshall put it. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret the rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. So...

...borrowing the reasoning in Marbury v. Madison.54 It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must necessarily expound and interpret that rule. If two rules conflict with each other, the courts must...

...is void." When then such conflict occurs, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply...cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule."86 Responding to the argument that the courts are to interpret only the law, not the Constitution...

...sentence Marshall immediately subjoined: "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply...cases, must of necessity expound and interpret that rule."14' This emphasis on "case" continues throughout the ensuing paragraphs of Marshall's opinion:...

...v. MadisonIt is, emphatically, the province and duty of the judicial departments to say what the Jaw is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases, must of necessity expound and interpret mat rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the operation of each. So,...

...continental point of view). Here we can read: It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply...to particular cases, must of necessity expound and TATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT self-enforcing equilibrium judicial review interpreter that rule. If two laws...

...u absurdity too gross to be insisted on. ... It u emphatically the province and dun of the judicial department to say what the law is. Those who apply...must of necessity expound and interpret that rule. It two lavs confiict with each other, the courts mutt decide on the operation of each. The Marbxty...