Skip to main content

Marbury v. Madison

"Marbury and others sought an original action for their commissions in the Supreme Court. But the congressional act conferring that authority conflicts with Article III Section 2 of the Constitution. The judicial power in the United States extends to all cases under the Constitution and the Supreme Court is bound to decide cases according to the Constitution rather than the law when the two conflict. So if a law is found to be in conflict with the Constitution, then the law is invalid. In this case, Section 13 of the Judiciary Act ran counter to the Constitution and is therefore void. Thus, lacking authority, the Supreme Court canceled Marbury's claim" (Oyez, Marbury v. Madison)

This passage is an explanation of why the Supreme Court rules that it did not have the authority to order the delivery of Marbury's and his peers' commissions. The reasoning that the Supreme Court provided is that although it is illegal for Madison to not deliver the commissions and his claim that the Supreme Court issue a writ of mandamus, which would force Madison to deliver the commissions, was valid, the section of the Judiciary Act that grants the Supreme Court this power is itself unconstitutional and therefore, the Supreme court does not have the power to issue a writ of mandamus.

I chose this case to discuss because Marbury v. Madison is a landmark case and the decision rendered is a testament to Chief Justice Marshall's brilliance. With one single decision, Chief Justice Marshall managed to not only establish judicial review but also managed to do render a verdict without causing any embarrassment to the Supreme Court. If the Supreme Court had issued the writ of mandamus as Marbury wanted, Madison would have refused to deliver the commissions anyway and the Court would have no way of enforcing its order and if the court had not issued a writ of mandamus, then President Jefferson would get his way. Instead of choosing either of those two scenarios, Chief Justice Marshall chose to declare that although the Supreme Court had the power to issue a writ of mandamus, the law that granted it that power was unconstitutional and thus, established the judicial review.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July?

"What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy — a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour" (Douglass). In this quote, Fredrick Douglass, while addressing the crowd gathered to celebrate the independence of the U.S, e...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Federalist #51

“It may be a reflection on human nature, that such devices should be necessary to control the abuses of government. But what is government itself, but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.” (Madison, Federalist #51). In this quote, Madison explains the necessity of forming a government that is not only strong enough to govern the people but also strong enough to keep its own powers in check. He insists that it is important to understand that man i...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nation of Immigrants

“Most of the federal Constitution builds on state constitutional ideas and practices. Naturalized citizens are allowed to lead every state; the rules for the presidency should follow suit. Ultimately, America should be more than a land where every child can one day grow up to become … governor” (Amar). In this passage, the author is arguing that the federal Constitution is an extension of the constitutional ideas and practices of the states and if a naturalized citizen can run and get elected to the highest offices of every state, then the same logic should follow for the presidency. He argues that it’s about time that America afford the same opportunities to the naturalized citizens as it does to natural born citizens. I chose this specific quote to discuss because as a naturalized citizen of the United States, who hopes to pursue a career in public service, I find it very problematic that under the current Constitution, someone like me can never be elected to the highest office o...
1 comment
Read more