Marbury v. Madison - Johnell W
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Grand Canyon University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
320
Subject
Law
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
4
Uploaded by SuperMorningSquirrel26
Johnell White Jr
JUS 325
2/26/2023
Professor Pamela Peiser
Marbury v. Madison
In December 1801, the Supreme Court decided the landmark decision Marbury v.
Madison. For the first time ever, the United States Supreme Judge declared that a court might
declare a congressional act invalid if it conflicted with the U.S. Constitution. When Thomas
Jefferson was inaugurated as president of the United States of America in 1801, this case first
came to light. Before Adams’ left office, William Marbury was selected a justice of the peace.
Marbury joined three other identical appointees to petition the court for an injunction for James
Madison to properly carry out his official duties and to grant them their commissions after he
initially refused to do so. Later, it seems that the affidavits reached a resolution in accordance
with the law, and that John Adams and later the US president officially appointed William
Marbury as a justice of the peace. The United States seal was then applied on it, but the
commission has never reached the intended recipient (Legal Information Institute, n.d.).
Justice Marshall's ultimate decision found that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was
unconstitutional. He said the Supreme Court didn't need to and shouldn't have heard the Marbury
case. Because the Supremacy Clause prioritizes the United States Constitution over all other
laws, it was claimed that Congress lacked the authority or resources necessary to alter or amend
the Constitution. Although sending Marbury a writ of mandamus would solve the issue, Justice
Marshall had determined that he couldn't do so. Chief Justice Marshall devoted far more pages
than necessary to constitutional issues to what we now refer to as legislative interpretation and
administrative law issues (Bamzai, 2016). The significance of Marbury v. Madison is that it led
to the Supreme Court being granted the authority to conduct judicial review as a result of this
decision. This case also paved the way for the judicial branch's eventual parity with the other
legislative and executive branches. Additionally, it contributed to the establishment of the United
States Supreme Court's authority to evaluate lower federal courts' adherence to the Constitution
and state courts' adherence to state constitutions. The ruling created the judicial review doctrine,
which acknowledges courts' power to declare laws unlawful (Marbury v. Madison, 2021).
The Judiciary Act of 1789's distribution, which allowed Marbury to address the Supreme
Court, was found to be unconstitutional by the court. This was due to the assertion that it would
extend the court's jurisdiction beyond what is provided for in Article III of the Constitution. This
choice was chosen with the purpose of maintaining the judiciary's participation in the Marbury v.
Madison case. This case strengthened the federal judiciary by giving federal courts the authority
to declare legislation invalid or unconstitutional and to nullify or void it. Although the court
determined that Madison's decision was in fact unlawful, it did not compel Madison to turn over
Marbury's commission. The Marbury case, seen through the lens of administrative law, concerns
whether and when the judiciary may order an Executive Branch employee to carry out his
statutory obligations (Bamzai, 2016).
The Marbury v. Madison decision, which was decided in 1803, gave the Supreme Court
an extremely difficult challenge to solve. Because this case was primarily founded on the United
States Constitution, many people at the time questioned the regulations that were in place.
Everyone was perplexed by all the legal rumors and didn't really know what to think. At first, it
was a major problem, and there was mayhem all throughout the courts, but it also helped lay a
stronger foundation for the courts. It offered fresh possibilities for dealing with cases that had the
same problems. The ultimate result was to strengthen the Supreme Court system; they gave the
Supreme Court the authority to wrap up judicial review, evaluate whether or not the cases are
constitutional, and render rulings on behalf of the government. Despite the uncertainty and
controversies this case caused, it did have one positive outcome, which was to increase the
ability of the courts to conduct judicial review.
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
References:
Bamzai, Aditya, Marbury v. Madison and the Concept of Judicial Deference (2016). 81 Missouri
Law Review 1057 (2016), Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2017-36, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3012221
Legal Information Institute. (n.d.).
William Marbury v. James Madison, secretary of State of the United States.
Legal Information Institute. Retrieved February 26, 2023, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/5/137
Marbury v. Madison. (2021). Columbia Electronic Encyclopedia