Constitutional scholars have pointed out there is an inconsistency in justice marshalls opinion with respect to what the constitution specifically provides. what is that inconsistency?

The inconsistency is that the decision ultimately ruled that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case. Marshall's opinion assumes the Constitution was written in the past tense, whereas it was actually written in the present perfect tense. This results in an internal inconsistency in Marshall's opinion with respect to what the Constitution specifically provides. 

Some Scholars argue that the Supreme Court is not allowed the power of Judicial review because it is not stated anywhere within the Constitution. However, many others argue that since the Supreme Court is the judge of all American Laws and the constitution is technically the supreme law of America, it should have sway. This inconsistency has been debated since Marbury, however, the Supreme Court has had the power of Judicial review ever since.