Name of the Reviewer: Junelie Guevarra
Author’s Name: Gabrielle Generoso
Peer Review / Term: Judicial Review
Thank you for your submission of Assignment 1.3. Please examine the peer review of your assignment below. The peer review includes suggestions on areas to improve.
First Impressions
The term Judicial Review is explained in full detail regarding the process and its systems which can lead to a judicial review. Relevant terms such as “separate but equal” and “dual court system” are explained concisely as to not deviate from the main definition of Judicial Review.
Organization
- The introduction was clear and concise and included all parts of the assignment. It was straight-forward and provided a clear goal of the assignment.
- The scenario can be better explained with a more specific example. The example section within the expanded definition can link back to the scenario within the “Target Audience and Scenario.”
Expression
- Relevant example that ties in historical impact of Judicial Review
- Provided certain pretences necessary for a Judicial Review
- Visual outlines how reviews go up the chain to Supreme Court
Content
The document is complete according to the assignment requirements; it includes
- An introduction which outlines the purpose of assignment
- 3 types of definitions (parenthetical, sentence and expanded definitions)
- 4 sections under expanded definition
- A visual which explains systems leading to a Judicial Review
- Works Cited
Visuals
- The diagram connects the previous section of Analysis of Parts and allows for easy understanding of the process; it may be beneficial to provide a diagram in which Judicial Review is the main focus of the diagram rather than its parts.
Grammar/Typos
- The phrase introducing the scenario under “Target Audience” can be written more concisely (Eg. As an example, a lawyer explains to their client the definition of Judicial Review in order to understand how their personal case can reach the Supreme Court to undergo this review.)
- Under “Required Conditions – Under what condition should Judicial Review be used?” of the expanded definition, the sentence which introduces the section has a typo where there is inconsistency with the past and present tense (ie. The conditions under which Judicial Review may be used varies depending on the jurisdiction, but generally it is use[d] when:)
- Under the section of “History: What is the history of Judicial Review?” the first sentence can be shortened into two sentences to emphasize the effect of the Judicial Review. (Eg. “The concept of Judicial review was established by the U.S Supreme Court in the landmark case Marbury v. Madison, where Chief Justice John Marshall declared that it was the responsibility of the courts to say what the law is. However, if a law is inconsistent with the Constitution, it is void (Singh, 2018).”
Works Cited
- The links to the articles or peer reviewed journals must be hyperlinks.
Overall Impressions
The definition of Judicial Review is very well laid out. It is easy to understand each section under the expanded definition. There are small errors which do not affect the overall assignment. Please examine comments and implement necessary changes:
- Concise sentence structure
- Specific scenario
- A more specific visual to illustrate Judicial Review
- Links in Works Cited changed to hyperlinks
Please do not hesitate to reach out with any questions or concerns, you can reach me at guevarrajunelie@gmail.com
Link of definition under review: https://blogs.ubc.ca/engl30199c2022w2/2023/02/10/assignment-1-3-defining-judicial-review/
Leave a Reply