Based on the arguments presented and court precedent, write an opinion (what you think the outcomes of the case should be and an explanation of why) either affirming the lower court's opinion (that the law is unconstitutional) or overturning the lower court's opinion (that the law is constitutional

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the Court formed the basis for the exercise of judicial review in the United States under Article III of the Constitution. The landmark decision helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separateexecutive and judicial branches of the American form of government.

The case resulted from a petition to the Supreme Court by William Marbury, who had been appointed Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia by President John Adams but whose commission was not subsequently delivered. Marbury petitioned the Supreme Court to force the new Secretary of State, James Madison, to deliver the documents. The Court, with John Marshall as Chief Justice, found firstly that Madison's refusal to deliver the commission was both illegal and correctible. Nonetheless, the Court stopped short of ordering Madison (by writ of mandamus) to hand over Marbury's commission, instead holding that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that enabled Marbury to bring his claim to the Supreme Court was itself unconstitutional, since it purported to extend the Court's original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III established. The petition was therefore denied.

so, based on the research i've done. the u.s. government were always on a wild goose chase just to take down castro. he then retired his trone to his brother raul in 2008 due to some health issues. so it's obvious your answer would be:

castro had no allies from which he could receive aid.

hope this and have a fantastic day!

                                                    -wolfiewolffromsketch