Embedded Files
Short Summary: The 1800 election ended in a defeat for John Adams to Thomas Jefferson. Before Adams’ term ended, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801 (creating new courts, adding new judges). It was an effort by John Adams to keep his own influence in federal courts even though he was leaving office (still occurs today.) His appointments to these courts, however, were not valid until the appointed judges were delivered their commissions by Jefferson’s Secretary of State. Marbury was one of the judges appointed; however, his commission was not delivered.
Constitutional Issue: A key issue was whether the Court had the authority to order the delivery of commission, and if a federal judge could even bring the case to court.
Holding and Constitutional Principle: The Court held that although legally, the commission should have been delivered, the clause of the Judiciary Act of 1789 which enabled Marbury to bring the case to court was unconstitutional. By declaring a law made by Congress unconstitutional, the practice of judicial review was established.
How did the balance of power between national and state governments change based on interpretations in Marbury v. Madison?
Strengthened the authority of the federal government relative to the states. Marbury v. Madison reinforced the authority of the federal judiciary to interpret the Constitution. The doctrine of judicial review (established by Marbury v. Madison) gave the Supreme Court the power to invalidate laws passed by Congress or actions taken by the executive branch if they are deemed unconstitutional.
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse