Earlier quoted context omitted.
You should have revisited the situation after fifth grade. Fifth grade teachers like to simplify things. Marbury introduced judicial review. It's not in the constitution.
Good thing I never mentioned judicial review, right? Appellate reviews satisfies my statement just fine. Also, while judicial review did become reinforced after Marbury v. Madison, you'll note that the power was derived from an interpretation of the Constitution, not the court itself. That the Constitution implies judicial review is in purview of SCOTUS is a long-accepted interpretation of the Constitution.
As to the persont earlier in this thread that said the consitiution "shouldn't" be black and white....wow u must be smoking crack. Law HAS to be black and white! otherwise what good is it? for instance, lets take something simple like traffic law in CA. The written law states that on a 2 lane divided highway the max speed limit is 55 MPH and on a 4 lane divided highway its 65 MPH (although counties can bump it up to 70 if they desire). So, most streets in decent sized towns you can legally drive 65 on if it is safe to do so. This is where the prima facia speed laws come into effect (like when the limit is set at 40 MPH in town). how they come up with this is the "85 percentile". 100 cars have their speed measured and what ever the avg speed of the 85% are going, thats what the limit is set at. So back to the written law, it stats that you can go faster than the posted limit if it is safe to do so. HERE'S WHERE THE BULLSH*T COMES INTO PLAY.... and whats