That line is obviously wrong, as I said. The Constitution, as the framers said and everyone (read the Anti-Federalists for example) acknowledged, grants the power of judicial review, if you don't want to listen to them you can read Article III ("the judicial power") and Article VI and it's pretty obvious. If the Court gave itself the power of judicial review in Marbury then how were they judging the constitutionality of laws in prior cases? How were state courts judging the constitutionality of laws basically forever despite the same grant of "the judicial power"? You're taking a position that's previously only been the domain of conservatives wanting to stop the courts from protecting gay rights, abortion rights, free speech and freedom from religion.
I find it strange that you're losing your mind and coming out against the rule of law so vehemently over something where the Court did the very thing you're now complaining about as beyond the pale and a threat to democracy. What do you think Roe was? The Court used judicial review to strike down (most) abortion bans as unconstitutional which imposed a minority view on the entire country.
Regarding some of your other claims I already outlined in the post Potato asked for how the Court has always been partisan and people have complained about it from the start including during the era of the framers when they actually tried to impeach a Justice over his views and eliminated one of the seats so that an opposition President could not fill it. So you can snark about it all you want but it doesn't make sense and sounds like you're arguing from ignorance to anyone who is cognizant of history.
