Marbury v. Madison, 1803 (Judicial Review) - ThoughtCo

WILLIAM MARBURY v. JAMES MADISON, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES.
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
5 U.S. 137
FEBRUARY, 1803 Term

Marbury v. Madison (1803) - Welcome to …
Photo provided by Flickr

The Court's decision actually declared that Marbury had a right to his appointment and that Jefferson had violated the law by ordering secretary Madison to withhold Marbury's commission. But there was another question to answer: Whether or not the Court had the right to issue a writ of mandamus to secretary Madison. The Judiciary Act of 1789 presumably granted the Court the power to issue a writ, but Marshall argued that the Act, in this case, was unconstitutional. He declared that under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution, the Court did not have "original jurisdiction" in this case, and therefore the Court did not have the power to issue a writ of mandamus.


Marbury v. Madison | Case Brief Summary

Marbury v. Madison - Social Studies for Kids
Photo provided by Flickr

On the surface, Marbury v. Madison was not a particularly important case, involving the appointment of one Federalist judge among many recently commissioned. But Chief Justice Marshall (who had served as Secretary of State under Adams and was not necessarily a supporter of Jefferson) saw the case as an opportunity to assert the power of the judicial branch.


Find out more about the history of Marbury v

Madison
John Marshall
1803
At the last term, viz., December term 1801, William Marbury, Dennis Ramsay, Robert, Robert Townsend Hooe, and William Harper, by their counsel, Charles Lee, Esq.

1: Introduction The landmark Supreme Court Case of Marbury v

late attorney general of the United States, severally moved the court for a rule to James Madison, Secretary of State of the United States, to show cause why a mandamus should not issue commanding him to cause to be delivered to them respectively their several commissions as justices of the peace in the District of Columbia.