"It is ... [the] duty of the judicial [branch] to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must ... interpret that rule. .. So, if a law [conflicts with] the Constitution, ... the Court must either decide that case [in favor of] the law, disregarding the Constitution, or (in favor of] the Constitution, disregarding the law... This is of the very essence of judicial duty." What conclusion did the Court reach to solve the problem identified in the passage? 5 (3 Points) It had to come up with a new law of its own. It should follow the law because it was more recent. It must strike down any law that contradicts the Constitution. It could choose to follow either the law or the Constitution. court decisions in Gideon V. Wainwright and Miranda V. Arizona have been​