<P> Marshall's opinion stated that in the Constitution, the people established a government of limited powers: "The powers of the Legislature are defined and limited; and that those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the Constitution is written ." The limits established in the Constitution would be meaningless "if these limits may at any time be passed by those intended to be restrained ." Marshall observed that the Constitution is "the fundamental and paramount law of the nation", and that it cannot be altered by an ordinary act of the legislature . Therefore, "an act of the Legislature repugnant to the Constitution is void ." </P> <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>

Which of the following courts exercises the judicial powers found in article iii of the constitution