Research Paprer 1 (1)

docx

School

Tarrant County College, Fort Worth *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

2327

Subject

Accounting

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by SuperDugongMaster1032

Wilson 1 Freddrick Wilson Prof. Cynthia Burrus GOVT 2305 February 15, 2024 The Real Case of 1803 The election of 1800 played out like a messy episode of The Real Housewives! One party is leaving, the other is taking over but clever actions ensue. When the shift of power isn’t so smoothly a few good men act and exercise their legal right to what's theirs. These actions in turn will change the political landscape and secure SCOTUS as the highest court in the land. It’s the 1800 election and Federalist President John Adams is defeated by Democratic Republican Thomas Jefferson. To keep Federalist power in judicial courts, President Adams in his final hours in office, signs and commissions over 50 Justice of the Peace and circuit court judges. He assigned his Secretary of State soon turned appointed judge John Marshall to hand deliver these documents. As mentioned in Law, Culture and the Humanities 15, “to enter into a discussion of Marbury is above all to enter into John Marshall's discussion of the Constitution.” (Clyde, 2019) But with such limited time on getting the commissions out, few would not receive them in time. One of these few would be William Marbury. With the incoming President instructing the new Secretary of State, James Madison to hold off presenting the commissions, Marbury was forced to file a petition in the Supreme Court to honor is right to commission. Madison had played so essential a

Wilson 2 role in the adoption of the Constitution and its first amendments. (Rakove. 2002) Marbury wanted the court to issue Madison a Writ of Mandamus, forcing him to tell the whereabouts of his undelivered document and why he couldn’t fulfill his rightful duty. The trial's presiding judge was former secretary of state and Federalist John Marshall! While he did rule that Murbary was rightfully entitled to his commission, he also ruled that because of not receiving his appointment in time, the court could not step outside its authority and grant his appointment or writ of man as Congress had done. As much as he may have wanted to rule in his favor, he referred to the Judiciary Act of 1789. This would make the approval of his appointment, therefore Congress, unjust. In this case, “Marbury's declaration that a provision in the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.” (Graber, rev. 2013) Marshall rules against Congress in that Section 13 of the law violates the constitution as it practiced unconstitutional rights. Giving them not only the power to hear such cases but rule against another court in its validity of the Constitution. In a following suit, he U.S. Supreme Court set up its own authority to rule on the constitutionality of laws, a process called judicial review. (Krutz & Waskiewicz, 2021) This makes this case important because it was a needed addition in checks and balances, enforcing better separation of powers by allowing the courts judicial review.

Wilson 3 A pro that is argued is the obvious security in checking the constitutional ethics of other branches of government. Marbury v. Madison resolved the question of judicial review - and expanded the role of the Supreme Court. This is a major effort and step forward in protecting individual rights and civil liberties. This expansion in the court's role and this ruling's effect is still intact and practiced today. A con that’s argued is the duality of importance this case has. Was it about Marbury, Madison, and a commission? Yes, but it was about rival political parties and the separation of powers. (Fawbush, Joseph. Marbury v. Madison Case Summary: What You Need to Know, Last reviewed March 24, 2023) In the effort to win his case, Marbury unfortunately helps uncover what made his commission invalid. Another con in this policy would be the obvious contradiction in law that served in favor of Madison who the court agreed should’ve originally complied. This case was so pivotal in the power struggle between the three branches of government because before this case the Supreme Court did not have power equal to or over the other two branches of government. Madison believed that a council of revision would enhance the independence of the judiciary by "giving it an additional opportunity to defend itself against legislative encroachments." (Saylor, J. R. pg. 92 line 16-21) Therefore, in a power that wasn't and still isn't granted in the Constitution, SCOTUS has seen its powers greatly expanded by proving its right to overturn acts of Congress.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Wilson 4 Works Cited Fawbush, Esq., Joseph. Legally reviewed by Marshall, Esq., Ally. Marbury v. Madison Case Summary: What You Need to Know. Last reviewed March 24, 2023 https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme-court-insights/marbury-v--madison-case- summary--what-you-need-to-know.html Graber, Mark A. Establishing Judicial Review: Marbury and the Judicial Act of 1789, 38 Tulsa L. Rev. 609 (2013). https://digitalcommons.law.utulsa.edu/tlr/vol38/iss4/4 Krutz, Glen and Waskiewicz, Sylvie PhD. American Government 3e. OpenStax. Jul 28, 2021 https://openstax.org/books/american-government-3e/pages/2-3-the-development-of-the- constitution Rakove, J. N. (2002). Judicial power in the constitutional theory of James Madison. William and Mary Law Review , 43 (4), 1513+. https://link-gale-com.tccd.idm.oclc.org/apps/doc/A87029965/AONE? u=txshracd2560&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=7859dd9d Ray, Clyde. (2019). John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, and The Construction of Constitutional Legitimacy. Law, Culture and the Humanities, 15(1), 205-226. https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/lculh15&i=202 Saylor, J. R. Judicial Review Prior to Marbury v. Madison Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 7 SW L.J. 88 (1953) https://scholar.smu.edu/smulr/vol7/iss1/7