Preview

Marbury v. Madison brief

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
373 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Marbury v. Madison brief
WILLIAM MARBURY V. JAMES MADISON, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE UNITED STATES 1803
5 U.S. 137, U.S. Supreme Court, 11-24 Feb. 1803
Facts:
The PETITIONER, William Marbury, was appointed by outgoing president of the United States John Adams as Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia. Thomas Jefferson, the newly elected president ordered not to deliver commissions to newly appointed judges, including the PETITIONER, making him unable to assume office. PETITIONER asked the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus (based on the Judiciary Act of 1789, which granted the Supreme Court jurisdiction over petitions for writs of mandamus) forcing the RESPONDENT, Secretary of State James Madison, to deliver his commission.
Issue:
- Does the PETITIONER have the right to the commission?
- Do the laws of the United States of America give the PETITIONER a legal remedy?
- Is asking the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus a correct legal course of action?
Ruling:
PETITIONER has the right to the commission. The laws of the United States of America give the PETITIONER a legal remedy. Asking the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus is incorrect legal course of action. Application for writ of mandamus denied. PETITIONER does not get the commission.
Reasoning:
Court ruled that the RESPONDENT violated its ministerial functions required by law by not delivering the commission, therefore the law provided the PETITIONER a remedy. In response to the third issue,
Court ruled that while writ of mandamus was the correct judicial means to order an official of the United States to do something required of him by law (in this case, deliver a commission), upon closer examination of the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court provided by the Judiciary act of 1789 (specifically, Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that authorizes the Supreme Court to issue writ of mandamus) the Court decided that it is in conflict with Article III of the Constitution. Court ruled that Congress does not

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    In Marbury v. Madison (1803) the supreme court had announced for the first time the concept that a court has the right to declare an act of congress void if it is inconsistent with the constitution. In addition William Marbury was an intended recipient of an appointment as a justice of the peace in the area of Columbia. Then when James Madison, Thomas Jefferson’s secretary of state, he refused to deliver Marbury’s commission. Marbury and 3 others joined and petitioned for a writ of mandamus compelling delivery of the…

    • 90 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    5. Marbury v. Madison: In this 1803 case, Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional because Congress had overstepped its bounds in granting the Supreme Court the power to issue a writ of mandamus (an ultimatum from the court) to any officer of the United States. This ruling established the principle of judicial review. Marbury's pay was cut.…

    • 592 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It was through these facts that Marbury brought a case before the supreme court challenging the validity of the actions by Madison in the refusal of complete the commission process. In filing Marbury sought Writ of mandamus that could compel state secretary Madison to execute the commission process. The writ mandamus forces a state office to complete a ministerial act as it is recognized by law and not individual…

    • 810 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Taking place in 1803, Marbury v. Madison was the landmark case that set the standard of judicial review into effect. This means that any previous ruling on a case can be used as a precedent and can determine the verdict. The background of this case is all sorts of messy; when John Adams’ term was near its end, William Marbury and a few others were appointed as “justices of peace” for the District of Columbia, however their positions were never official. When Thomas Jefferson came into office, he told James Madison, the Secretary of State at the time, to deny Marshall and the others’ commissions, so Marbury and the others then sued Madison. John Marshall ruled in favor of Marbury however could not deliver his commission because the constitution conflicted with a legislative act known as the Judiciary Act of 1789. This case was significant because it served as the basis for Article III of the Constitution that sets the standards…

    • 529 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Unit 1 P4 P5

    • 1161 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Whenever these rights are violated, the victim may take the service or person to take and challenge the actions of the violator.…

    • 1161 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    He is working with the Legal Aid of Greater Cincinnati , and they recommend he get a petition signed on his behalf.…

    • 780 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hamilton focuses on three subjects in this paper. First, the process of appointing judges. Second, the tenure which they are to hold their places. Lastly, the judiciary authority among different courts and their relationship (Hamilton p.1). This paper examines the justification for their tenure, meaning the appointment for life under a good behavior. Once comparing the three branches, Hamilton discusses the judiciary as the least dangerous to the political rights of the constitution because it does not have the force or the will (Hamilton p.2). He explains force as decisions made by the court that can only be implemented by the executive branch. Will is the fact that courts are not able to interpret the law according to their desires or political views. By making this comparison, Hamilton makes the first important point in this paper, the terms of office should be appointed to life to protect the judiciary from the other stronger branches of government (Hamilton p.2). His second point is regarding the limited constitution that gives enumerated powers to the federal government.…

    • 217 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    An abstract idea is not patentable simply because it is tied to a computer system. That was the primary finding in the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd v. CLS Bank International, No. 13-298, (U.S.…

    • 2739 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Government for a redress of grievances.” In the case Irene Ryan v. United States, understanding…

    • 1358 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Manotoc vs Ca Digest

    • 439 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Petitioner filed before each trial court motion for permission to leave the country stating his desire to go to US relative to his business transactions and opportunities. Such was opposed by the prosecution and was also denied by the judges. He filed petition for certiorari with CA seeking to annul the prior orders and the SEC communication request denying his leave to travel abroad.…

    • 439 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The plaintiff prayed to the court for an injunction to restrain the second defendant from continuing to take part in the management of the company and that the transfer to Ho Kum Chen, and subsequently to the first defendant was void because it did not comply with art 34A of the company's articles of association.…

    • 408 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Sandiganbayan Case Study

    • 24161 Words
    • 97 Pages

    The jurisdictional question is posed in this petition for certiorari assailing the Resolutions1 of the Sandiganbayan, Fifth Division, denying petitioner’s motion to quash the information and her motion for reconsideration.…

    • 24161 Words
    • 97 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hawkers

    • 318 Words
    • 2 Pages

    “We have filed a contempt petition against the government in the Supreme Court but the matter is pending for a year and the hearing adjourned several times,” said…

    • 318 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Pil Cases

    • 5903 Words
    • 24 Pages

    • The court now permits Public Interest Litigation or Social Interest Litigation at the instance of " Public spirited citizens" for the enforcement of constitutional & legal…

    • 5903 Words
    • 24 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    "There is no question of delay in presenting a petition for a writ of quo warranto in which the right of a person to function in a certain capacity is challenged because every day the person so acts in that capacity a fresh cause of action…

    • 1332 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays