Marbury v. Madison

Official_Presidential_portrait_of_Thomas_Jefferson_(by_Rembrandt_Peale,_1800)

Marbury

USCapitol1800

Marbury_v_Madison_John_Marshall_by_Swatjester

Marshall-john-engraving-LOC-1808

Grand_Jury_Subpoena_Duces_Tecum_to_Richard_M._Nixon_to_Testify_and_Bring_Documents_or_Objects_Listed,_with_Attached_Schedule_of_Documents_or_Objects_to_be_Produced_by_or_on_Behalf_of_Richard_M._Nixon_-_NARA_-_7582824_(page_1)

{{#invoke:infobox|infoboxTemplate

| italic title = | bodyclass = scotus ib-court-case | templatestyles = Infobox court case/styles.css

| above = Marbury v. Madison | aboveclass = fn | image = {{#if:|[[File:{{{image}}}|image=|size=|sizedefault=frameless|upright=0.82|alt= }} | autoheaders = yes | caption =

| label1 = Court | data1 = Supreme Court of the United States

| label2 = Full case name | data2 = William Marbury v. James Madison, Secretary of State of the United States

| label3 = Argued | data3 =

| label4 = Reargued | data4 =

| label5 = Submitted | data5 =

| label6 = Indictment | data6 =

| label7 = Started | data7 =

| label8 = Decided | data8 =

| label9 = Docket nos. | data9 =

| label10 = Verdict | data10 =

| label11 = Defendant | data11 =

| label12 = Charge | data12 =

| label13 = Prosecution | data13 =

| label14 = Counsel for plaintiff | data14 =

| label15 = Plaintiff | data15 =

| label16 = Defence | data16 =

| label17 = Witnesses | data17 =

| label18 = Citation | data18 = 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)

| label19 = ECLI | data19 =

| label20 = Neutral citation | data20 =

| label21 = Reported at | data21 =

| label22 = Transcript | data22 = Full text of the opinion

| label23 = Claim | data23 =

| label24 = Cases cited | data24 =

| label25 = Legislation cited | data25 =

| header27 = Case history

| label28 = Prior action | data28 =

| label29 = Appealed from | data29 =

| label30 = Appealed to | data30 =

| label31 = Subsequent action | data31 =

| label32 = Procedural history | data32 =

| label33 = Related action | data33 =

| label34 = Argument | data34 =

| label35 = Reargument | data35 =

| label36 = Opinion announcement | data36 =

| header42 = Outcome | data43 =

| header44 = Questions presented | data45 =

| header46 = Holding | data47 = The Supreme Court has the authority to review acts of Congress and determine whether they are unconstitutional and to declare them void.

| header48 = Ruling | data49 =

| header52 = Court membership | label53 = Judge sitting | data53 =

| label54 = Chief judge | data54 =

| label55 = Associate judges | data55 =

| header56 = Case opinions | data57 =

| data58 =

| label59 = Decision by | data59 =

| label60 = Majority | data60 =

| label61 = Majority | data61 =

| label62 = Majority | data62 =

| label63 = Plurality | data63 =

| label64 = Plurality | data64 =

| label65 = Plurality | data65 =

| label66 = Plurality | data66 =

| label67 = Seriatim opinion | data67 =

| label68 = Seriatim opinion | data68 =

| label69 = Seriatim opinion | data69 =

| label70 = Seriatim opinion | data70 =

| label71 = Seriatim opinion | data71 =

| label72 = Concurrence | data72 =

| label73 = Concurrence | data73 =

| label74 = Concurrence | data74 =

| label75 = Concurrence | data75 =

| label76 = Concurrence | data76 =

| label77 = Concurrence | data77 =

| label78 = Concurrence | data78 =

| label79 = Concurrence | data79 =

| label80 = Concur/dissent | data80 =

| label81 = Concur/dissent | data81 =

| label82 = Concur/dissent | data82 =

| label83 = Concur/dissent | data83 =

| label84 = Concur/dissent | data84 =

| label85 = Concur/dissent | data85 =

| label86 = Concur/dissent | data86 =

| label87 = Concur/dissent | data87 =

| label88 = Dissent | data88 =

| label89 = Concurrence | data89 =

| label90 = Dissent | data90 =

| label91 = Concurrence | data91 =

| label92 = Dissent | data92 =

| label93 = Concurrence | data93 =

| label94 = Dissent | data94 =

| label95 = Concurrence | data95 =

| label96 = Dissent | data96 =

| data97 =

| header98 = Laws applied

| data99 =

| data100 =

| data101 =

| data102 =

| data103 =

| data104 =

| data105 =

| data106 =

| data107 =

| header108 = Keywords | data109 =

| header110 = Area of law | data111 =

}}

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws, statutes, and some government actions that they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. The decision, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, is considered one of the foundations of United States constitutional law.

Background

The case began with the Judiciary Act of 1801, which was passed by the outgoing Federalist Congress and signed into law by President John Adams. The act created new judicial positions, which Adams filled with Federalist appointees in an effort to maintain Federalist control of the judiciary. One of these appointees was William Marbury, who was appointed as a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia.

However, when Thomas Jefferson took office as President, his Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver the commissions to the appointees, including Marbury. Marbury then petitioned the Supreme Court to compel Madison to deliver the commissions.

The Decision

Chief Justice John Marshall delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court. The Court held that while Marbury was indeed entitled to his commission, the Court did not have the authority to issue a writ of mandamus compelling Madison to deliver the commission because the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that granted the Supreme Court the power to issue such writs was unconstitutional. This was the first time the Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the principle of judicial review.

Significance

The decision in Marbury v. Madison established the principle of judicial review, which allows the Supreme Court to invalidate laws and executive actions that are found to be unconstitutional. This case is considered a cornerstone of the American constitutional system and has had a profound impact on the development of the American legal and political system.

Related Pages

• Judicial review
• John Marshall
• United States Constitution
• Federalist Party (United States)
• Thomas Jefferson
• James Madison
• Judiciary Act of 1801
• Writ of mandamus

See Also

• List of United States Supreme Court cases
• History of the Supreme Court of the United States
• Separation of powers