Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Posted by on

 

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

📍 Court

Supreme Court of the United States

👥 Parties

  • Plaintiff: William Marbury

  • Defendant: James Madison (Secretary of State)

📜 Facts of the Case

  • In 1801, outgoing President John Adams appointed several judges (“midnight judges”).

  • William Marbury was appointed Justice of the Peace.

  • His commission was signed and sealed but not delivered before Adams left office.

  • New President Thomas Jefferson ordered Secretary of State James Madison not to deliver the commission.

  • Marbury filed a case directly in the Supreme Court, asking for a writ of mandamus to compel Madison to deliver it.

⚖️ Legal Issues

  1. Did Marbury have a right to the commission?

  2. If yes, was there a legal remedy?

  3. Could the Supreme Court issue a writ of mandamus under its original jurisdiction?

📖 Laws Involved

  • Article III of the U.S. Constitution

  • Judiciary Act of 1789, Section 13

🧠 Court’s Reasoning (Chief Justice John Marshall)

  1. Right exists:
    Marbury had a legal right once the commission was signed and sealed.

  2. Remedy exists:
    Where there is a legal right, there must be a legal remedy.

  3. But the Court lacks jurisdiction:

    • Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 expanded the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction.

    • This expansion conflicted with Article III of the Constitution.

    • The Constitution is supreme law.

🏛️ Judgment

  • The Supreme Court refused to issue the writ of mandamus.

  • Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was declared unconstitutional.

✅ Holding

The Supreme Court has the power of judicial review — the authority to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional.

📌 Significance

  • Established Judicial Review in the U.S.

  • Confirmed the supremacy of the Constitution over ordinary laws.

  • Strengthened the role of the judiciary as an equal branch of government.

  • Became the foundation of constitutional interpretation worldwide.

🧩 Impact Beyond the USA

  • Influenced constitutional courts in India, Canada, Australia, and others.

  • Frequently cited in cases dealing with constitutional supremacy and separation of powers.

✍️ Famous Line

“It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”


Comments

Post a Comment