MARBURY v. MADISON (1803) ORIGINS OF THE CASE A few days before Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration, outgoing president John Adams appointed William Marbury to be a justice of the peace. But the commission was not delivered to Marbury. Later, Jefferson’s new secretary of state, James Madison, refused to give Marbury the commission. Marbury asked the Supreme Court to force Madison to give him his commission. THE RULING The Court declared that the law on which Marbury based his claim was unconstitutional, and therefore it refused to order Madison to give Marbury his commission. LEGAL REASONING Writing for the Court, Chief Justice John Marshall decid- ed that Marbury had a right to his commission, and he scolded Madison at length for refusing to deliver it. However, he then considered Marbury’s claim that, under the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Supreme Court should order Madison to deliver the commission. As Marshall pointed out, the powers of the Supreme Court are set by the Constitution, and Congress does not have the authority to alter them. The Judiciary Act attempt- ed to do just that. Marshall reasoned that, since the Constitution is the “supreme law of the land, no law that goes against the Constitution can be valid.” “ If . . . the courts are to regard the constitution, and the constitution is superior to any ordinary act of the legislature, the constitution, and not such ordinary act, must govern the case to which they both apply.” If an act of Congress violates the Constitution, then a judge must uphold the Constitution and declare the act void. In choosing to obey the Constitution, the Supreme Court did declare the Judiciary Act unconstitu- tional and void, and so refused to grant Marbury’s request. 206 CHAPTER 6 Chief Justice John Marshall ▼ FLETCHER v. PECK (1810) The Court ruled a state law unconstitutional for the first time. COHENS v. VIRGINIA (1821) The Court overturned a state court decision for the first time. GIBBONS v. OGDEN (1824) The Court ruled that the federal Congress—not the states—had the power under the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce. RELATED CASES U.S. CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 (1788) “The judicial power shall extend to all cases . . . arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made . . . under their authority.” U.S. CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE VI, CLAUSE 2 (1788) “This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof . . . shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby.” U.S. CONSTITUTION LEGAL SOURCES CHAPTER 6 • SECTION 4 BOOKS Clinton, Robert Lowry. Marbury v. Madison and Judicial Review. Lawrence: U of Kansas P, 1991. In- depth study of the historic case. Kahn, Paul. The Reign of Law: Marbury v. Madison and the Construction of America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1997. Nelson, William E. Marbury v. Madison: The Origins and Legacy of Judicial Review. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 2000. Student-friendly study of the impact of the landmark Supreme Court case. Smith, Jean Edward. John Marshall: Definer of a Nation. New York: Henry Holt, 1998. Comprehensive biography of a Supreme Court Chief Justice. INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY For teacher support and more informa- tion about the Supreme Court including the full text of the Supreme Court deci- sions, visit . . . classzone.com 206 CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDED RESOURCES HISTORIC DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT Objectives • To examine the central issues in Marbury v. Madison and the significance of the Supreme Court’s ruling • To recognize the impact of judicial review on the American political system Focus & Motivate Evaluating Ask students to describe the role of the Supreme Court in the United States government. Ask them why they think it might be important for the Supreme Court to have the authority to interpret the Constitution. More About . . . Marbury v. Madison There were a number of critics of the Supreme Court’s ruling in Marbury v. Madison. Thomas Jefferson did not believe that the Supreme Court had the right to declare Congressional acts unconstitutional. In 1804, while president, Jefferson wrote, “[T]he opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the legislature and executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch.” In other words, Thomas Jefferson feared the Supreme Court, as just one branch of the government, would wield too much power. Historical Decisions of the Supreme Court • Marbury v. Madison, pp. 1–6
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
MARBURY v. MADISON (1803)ORIGINS OF THE CASE A few days before Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration, outgoingpresident John Adams appointed William Marbury to be a justice of the peace. But thecommission was not delivered to Marbury. Later, Jefferson’s new secretary of state, JamesMadison, refused to give Marbury the commission. Marbury asked the Supreme Court toforce Madison to give him his commission.
THE RULING The Court declared that the law on which Marbury based his claim wasunconstitutional, and therefore it refused to order Madison to give Marbury his commission.
LEGAL REASONINGWriting for the Court, Chief Justice John Marshall decid-ed that Marbury had a right to his commission, and hescolded Madison at length for refusing to deliver it.
However, he then considered Marbury’s claim that,under the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Supreme Courtshould order Madison to deliver the commission. AsMarshall pointed out, the powers of the Supreme Courtare set by the Constitution, and Congress does not havethe authority to alter them. The Judiciary Act attempt-ed to do just that.
Marshall reasoned that, since the Constitution isthe “supreme law of the land, no law that goes againstthe Constitution can be valid.”
“ If . . . the courts are to regard the constitution,and the constitution is superior to any ordinary actof the legislature, the constitution, and not suchordinary act, must govern the case to which theyboth apply.”
If an act of Congressviolates the Constitution,then a judge must upholdthe Constitution anddeclare the act void. Inchoosing to obey theConstitution, the SupremeCourt did declare theJudiciary Act unconstitu-tional and void, and sorefused to grant Marbury’srequest.
206 CHAPTER 6
Chief Justice John Marshall
▼
FLETCHER v. PECK (1810)The Court ruled a state law unconstitutional for thefirst time.
COHENS v. VIRGINIA (1821)The Court overturned a state court decision for thefirst time.
GIBBONS v. OGDEN (1824)The Court ruled that the federal Congress—not thestates—had the power under the Constitution to regulate interstate commerce.
RELATED CASES
U.S. CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE III, SECTION 2 (1788)
“The judicial power shall extend to all cases . . . arising under this Constitution, the laws of the UnitedStates, and treaties made . . . under their authority.”
U.S. CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE VI, CLAUSE 2 (1788)
“This Constitution, and the laws of the United Stateswhich shall be made in pursuance thereof . . . shallbe the supreme law of the land; and the judges inevery State shall be bound thereby.”
U.S. CONSTITUTION
LEGAL SOURCES
CHAPTER 6 • SECTION 4
BOOKS
Clinton, Robert Lowry. Marbury v.Madison and Judicial Review.Lawrence: U of Kansas P, 1991. In-depth study of the historic case.
Kahn, Paul. The Reign of Law:Marbury v. Madison and theConstruction of America. New Haven:Yale University Press, 1997.
Nelson, William E. Marbury v.Madison: The Origins and Legacy ofJudicial Review. Lawrence: Universityof Kansas Press, 2000. Student-friendlystudy of the impact of the landmarkSupreme Court case.
Smith, Jean Edward. John Marshall:Definer of a Nation. New York: HenryHolt, 1998. Comprehensive biographyof a Supreme Court Chief Justice.
INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGYFor teacher support and more informa-tion about the Supreme Court includingthe full text of the Supreme Court deci-sions, visit . . .
classzone.com
206 CHAPTER 6
RECOMMENDED RESOURCES
HISTORIC DECISIONS OFTHE SUPREME COURT
Objectives• To examine the central issues in Marburyv. Madison and the significance of theSupreme Court’s ruling
• To recognize the impact of judicial reviewon the American political system
Focus & MotivateEvaluating Ask students to describe the roleof the Supreme Court in the United Statesgovernment. Ask them why they think it mightbe important for the Supreme Court to havethe authority to interpret the Constitution.
More About . . .
Marbury v. MadisonThere were a number of critics of theSupreme Court’s ruling in Marbury v.Madison. Thomas Jefferson did not believethat the Supreme Court had the right todeclare Congressional acts unconstitutional.In 1804, while president, Jefferson wrote,“[T]he opinion which gives to the judges theright to decide what laws are constitutional,and what not, not only for themselves in theirown sphere of action, but for the legislatureand executive also, in their spheres, wouldmake the judiciary a despotic branch.” Inother words, Thomas Jefferson feared theSupreme Court, as just one branch of thegovernment, would wield too much power.
Historical Decisions of the Supreme Court• Marbury v. Madison, pp. 1–6
WHY IT MATTEREDIn 1803, interest in Marbury’s commission was prima-rily about partisan politics. The fight was just oneskirmish in the ongoing battle between Federalists,such as Adams, and Democratic-Republicans, led byJefferson and Madison, which had intensified in theelection of 1800.
When Jefferson won the election, Adams made afinal effort to hinder Jefferson’s promised reforms.Before leaving office, he tried to fill the governmentwith Federalists, including the “midnight” justicessuch as Marbury. Madison’s refusal to deliverMarbury’s appointment was part of Jefferson’s subse-quent effort to rid his administration of Federalists.
Marshall’s opinion in Marbury might seem like avictory for Jefferson because it denied Marbury hiscommission. However, by scolding Madison andextending the principle of judicial review—the powerof courts to decide whether or not specific laws arevalid—the Court sent a message to Jefferson and tothe Congress that the judiciary had the power to affectlegislation. The Marshall Court, however, neverdeclared another act of Congress unconstitutional.
HISTORICAL IMPACTIn striking down part of the Judiciary Act, an act ofCongress, Marshall gave new force to the principle ofjudicial review. The legacy of John Marshall and ofMarbury is that judicial review has become a corner-stone of American government. One scholar has calledit “America’s novel contribution to political theoryand the practice of constitutional government.” AsJustice Marshall recognized, judicial review is an essen-tial component of democratic government; by ensur-ing that Congress exercises only those powers grantedby the Constitution, the courts protect the sovereign-ty of the people.
Perhaps more importantly, the principle of judicialreview plays a vital role in our federal system of checksand balances. With Marbury, the judicial branchsecured its place as one of three coequal branches ofthe federal government. The judiciary has no power tomake laws or to carry them out. However, judges havean important role in deciding what the law is and howit is carried out.
In City of Boerne v. Flores (1997), for instance, theSupreme Court declared void the Religious FreedomRestoration Act of 1993. Members of Congress hadpassed the act in an attempt to change the way feder-al courts apply the First Amendment’s Free ExerciseClause. The Supreme Court ruled that Congress doesnot have the authority to decide what the FirstAmendment means—in effect, to define its own pow-ers. The Court, and not Congress, is the interpreter ofthe Constitution.
Through the 1999–2000 term, the Court had ren-dered 151 decisions striking down—in whole or part—acts of Congress. It had also voided or restricted theenforcement of state laws 1,130 times. That the entirecountry has with few exceptions obeyed these deci-sions, no matter how strongly they disagreed, provesAmericans’ faith in the Supreme Court as the protectorof the rule of law.
Launching a New Nation 207
THINKING CRITICALLYTHINKING CRITICALLY
CONNECT TO HISTORY 1. Comparing Read encyclopedia articles about another
Marshall Court decision, such as Fletcher v. Peck,Cohens v. Virginia, or Gibbons v. Ogden. Compare that decision with Marbury and consider what the twocases and opinions have in common. Write a paragraphexplaining the major similarities between the cases.
SEE SKILLBUILDER HANDBOOK, PAGE R8.
CONNECT TO TODAY 2.
Visit the links for Historic Decisions of the Supreme Courtto research a recent Supreme Court decision involvingjudicial review of an act of Congress. Write a case summary in which you describe the law’s purpose, theCourt’s ruling, and the potential impact of the decision.
IINTERNET ACTIVITY CLASSZONE.COM
WilliamMarbury
▼
CHAPTER 6 • SECTION 4
Launching the New Nation 207
CONNECT TO HISTORYRubricsStudent paragraphs should:• document the similarities between selected cases• explain the reasoning behind the comparison• provide factual evidence and background information about thecases to support the opinion
CONNECT TO TODAYRubricsStudent summaries should:• briefly describe the background of each case• present the crucial facts and court decisions • include quotes and other research findings
classzone.com
THINKING CRITICALLY: ANSWERSTHINKING CRITICALLY: ANSWERS
Instruct1. What was the reasoning behind the
Supreme Court’s decision in Marbury v.Madison?
2. What is the principle of judicial review?3. How did City of Boerne v. Flores exem-
plify the ongoing relevance of Marburyv. Madison?
MAKING PERSONAL CONNECTIONS
Ask students whether they have a person, orpersons, in their lives who have the final sayon what they are allowed to do. How do theyfeel about such an arrangement?
More About . . .
Judicial ReviewThe power of judicial review was demon-strated in the 1974 case, United States v.Nixon. During an investigation of theWatergate scandal, the Supreme Courtordered President Richard Nixon to turn overtape recordings of White House conversationsto investigators. Many Americans saw the rul-ing as a democratic triumph. In the 2000presidential election, the vote recount dis-pute ended up in the U.S. Supreme Court.The Supreme Court ruled that the Selectively-applied recount procedure violated the EqualProtection Clause of the FourteenthAmendment. Some Americans felt that theSupreme Court had overstepped its authorityby becoming involved in a process thatdecided the outcome of an election.
Related Documents
