Which of the following best describes judicial review?

Judicial review is best described as the process by which courts evaluate the constitutionality of legislative acts. This concept arises from the notion that it is the judiciary's role to interpret the law and ensure that any laws or actions taken by legislative bodies do not violate the Constitution. This power serves as a check on the other branches of government, ensuring that no law contradicts the fundamental principles outlined in the Constitution. When a court conducts a judicial review, it reviews the legislative act in question and determines whether it is consistent with constitutional standards.

The other options do not accurately capture the essence of judicial review. For instance, while the ability of legislatures to amend the Constitution is a critical aspect of the constitutional process, it does not involve the judicial branch assessing the legality of laws. The election process for judges pertains to how judges are selected and does not relate to their role in reviewing laws. Similarly, oversight of public programs refers to administrative or governmental management, which is distinct from the judicial function of reviewing laws for constitutionality. Thus, the process where courts assess the alignment of legislative acts with constitutional mandates is what constitutes judicial review.