The Marbury v. Madison legal case on February 24, 1803 initially declared an act of Congress unlawful, consequently establishing the regulation of judicial review. The court’s judgement, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, is viewed as one of the foundations of U.S. constitutional law.
Say no to plagiarism.
Get a tailor-made essay on
'The Marbury V. Madison Legal Case'
Weeks before Thomas Jefferson’s inauguration as President in March 1801, the intermediary Federalist Congress made 16 new circuit judgeships in the Judiciary Act of 1801 and an unspecified number of new judgeships in the Organic Act which Adams continued to load with Federalists in an effort to save his party’s control of the legal system and to frustrate the legislative agenda of Jefferson and his Republican Party. William Marbury, a Federalist Party pioneer from Maryland, did not receive his commission before Jefferson became president. Once in office, Jefferson coordinated his secretary of state, James Madison, to withhold the commission, and Marbury requested of the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus to urge Madison to act.
Marbury and his lawyer, former attorney general Charles Lee, argued that signing and sealing the commission completed the transaction and that delivery, in any event, constituted a mere formality. But formality or not, without the actual piece of parchment, Marbury could not enter into the duties of office. Despite Jefferson’s hostility, the court agreed to hear the case, Marbury v. Madison, in its February 1803 term.
Some scholars have questioned whether Marshall should have removed himself from the case because of his prior service as Adams’s secretary of state (1800–01). Certainly, later judicial standards would have called for recusal, but at the time only financial connections to a case led judges to step aside, as Marshall did in suits regarding Virginia lands in which he had an interest. The Republicans, always quick to criticize Marshall, did not even raise the issue of the propriety of his sitting in the case.
Keep in mind:
This is only a sample.
Get a custom paper now from our expert writers.
The issue directly presented by Marbury v. Madison can only be described as minor. By the time the court heard the case, the wisdom of Jefferson’s desire to reduce the number of justices of the peace had been confirmed (and the Judiciary Act of 1801 had been repealed); Marbury’s original term was almost half over; and most people, Federalists and Republicans alike, considered the case to be moot. But Marshall, despite the political difficulties involved, recognized that he had a perfect case with which to expound a basic principle, judicial review, which would secure the Supreme Court’s primary role in constitutional interpretation.
