Marbury v. Madison: Difference between revisions
imported>Shamira Gelbman |
imported>Shamira Gelbman |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
''Marbury v. Madison'' raised three legal questions: First, was Marbury entitled to the appointment? Second, if he was entitled to the appointment, do the laws of the United States provide a remedy for its deprivation? Finally, if the laws of the United States do provide a remedy for Marbury, was the Supreme Court the appropriate venue from which to seek it? | ''Marbury v. Madison'' raised three legal questions: First, was Marbury entitled to the appointment? Second, if he was entitled to the appointment, do the laws of the United States provide a remedy for its deprivation? Finally, if the laws of the United States do provide a remedy for Marbury, was the Supreme Court the appropriate venue from which to seek it? | ||
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. He maintained, first, that Marbury was indeed entitled to his appointment, which had been duly signed and sealed by President Adams and his secretary of state. Jefferson's order to Madison to withhold the commission was therefore a violation of Marbury's right. | Chief Justice [[John Marshall]] wrote the opinion of the Court. He maintained, first, that Marbury was indeed entitled to his appointment, which had been duly signed and sealed by President Adams and his secretary of state. Jefferson's order to Madison to withhold the commission was therefore a violation of Marbury's right. | ||
== Constitutional implications == | == Constitutional implications == | ||
Revision as of 13:45, 4 March 2009
Marbury v. Madison[1] was a landmark case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1803. In its unanimous ruling that a section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 conflicted with Article III of the Constitution, the Court established its power of judicial review, which is the power to adjudicate the constitutionality of actions taken by the government's legislative and executive branches.
Facts of the case
William Marbury was one of several "midnight appointments" made by outgoing President John Adams at the very end of his term. The Senate approved the appointments, but a few of the commissions, including Marbury's, were not delivered prior to the transfer of presidential power from Adams to his successor, Thomas Jefferson. Upon taking office, Jefferson ordered his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the undelivered commissions and issued his own replacement appointments over the next couple of weeks.
Legal questions and ruling
Marbury v. Madison raised three legal questions: First, was Marbury entitled to the appointment? Second, if he was entitled to the appointment, do the laws of the United States provide a remedy for its deprivation? Finally, if the laws of the United States do provide a remedy for Marbury, was the Supreme Court the appropriate venue from which to seek it?
Chief Justice John Marshall wrote the opinion of the Court. He maintained, first, that Marbury was indeed entitled to his appointment, which had been duly signed and sealed by President Adams and his secretary of state. Jefferson's order to Madison to withhold the commission was therefore a violation of Marbury's right.
Constitutional implications
References
- ↑ 5 U.S. 137 (1803)