Can the view that each branch has the right and responsibility to decide for itself whether something is constitutional (thus giving it the right to act in its own discretion, such as Jackson and “Mr. Marshall has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it.”) be reconciled with the fact that, during the Philadelphia Convention, when Madison said the judiciary should be given veto power and that he wanted checks and balances, not separation of powers, the convention rejected his motion in favor of separation of powers?
Is there any compatibility between the concepts of separation of powers and checks and balances?
.
