<P> Marshall then discussed the role of the courts, which is at the heart of the doctrine of judicial review . It would be an "absurdity", said Marshall, to require the courts to apply a law that is void . Rather, it is the inherent duty of the courts to interpret and apply the Constitution, and to determine whether there is a conflict between a statute and the Constitution: </P> <Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> 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, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule . If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each . <P> So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case . This is of the very essence of judicial duty . </P> <P> If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply...</P> </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr> </Table> <Tr> <Td> "</Td> <Td> 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, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule . If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each . <P> So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case . This is of the very essence of judicial duty . </P> <P> If, then, the Courts are to regard the Constitution, and the Constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the Legislature, the Constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply...</P> </Td> <Td>" </Td> </Tr> <P> So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case . This is of the very essence of judicial duty . </P>

Why does the u.s supreme court have only limited jurisdiction