<\/p>\n
William Marbury is one of the \u201cmidnight appointees” contained a complaint with the Supreme Court that they should order Madison to deliver his commission based on an agreement of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that allowed the Court to hear cases on original juridiction. The case appeared in the aftermath of the stormy elections of 1800 when Marbury had been elected to be a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia. The Senate had verified his appointment and President Adam signed the commissions of office for Marbury and for a number for other new judges on the night of March 3, 1801. Jefferson became the President the next day and found out that Marbury\u2019s commission and several others had not been sent so he asked the Court to issue a\u00a0writ\u00a0of\u00a0mandamus,\u00a0requiring Madison to deliver the appointment. In the case named Marbury v. Madison (1803) Mabury declared unconstitutional the law to give him the right to appeal Madison\u2019s action through Chief Justice Marshall. This was a great success for the Supreme Court because it affirmed the Court\u2019s right to ratify acts of Congress unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
According to the opinion written by Chief Justice John Marshall, the Court refused Marbury\u2019s request because they found the part in the Judiciary Act that Marbury set his case to be in conflict with the Constitution. Marshall\u2019s forceful opinion was based on its own term called supreme law of the land and all legislative acts and other actions of government are dependent to the supreme law also cannot be allowed to conflict with it and finally judges are sworn to enforce the provisions of the Constitution must reject to enforce any government action they found to be in conflict with it. The Court decided Marbury request on a\u00a0writ\u00a0of mandamus\u00a0was based on the law that passed by Congress of the Court held to be unconstitutional also the federal law disagreed the Constitution although the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and it have rule supreme. The Chief Justice John Marshall in this case established power of judicial review that the power of the Court not only interprets the constitutionality of a law \/ statute but also carry out the process and enforce its decision.<\/p>\n
The impact of the Court\u2019s decision goes too far from the fate of an obscure individual named William Marbury. Chief Justice Marshall requested for the Supreme Court the right to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional and arrange the foundation for the judicial branches\u2019 key role in the development of American system of government. The Court has used its power of judicial review in thousands of cases since 1803. Usually it has upheld the constitutionality of federal and State actions. Each year it hears dozens of cases in which questions of constitutionality are not raised but in which federal law is interpreted and applied. Therefore, many of the more important statutes that Congress has passed have been brought to the Supreme Court time and for decision. Interpreting those laws and applying them to specific situations, the Court has had a real impact on both their meaning and their affect. In short Marbury v. Madison established the principle that the United State Supreme Court has the power, authority and the right to void laws that is considers unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
The Court’s ruled in\u00a0Marbury v. Madison\u00a0verified an important precedent. Chief Justice Marshall’s ruling interpreted the Constitution that the Supreme Court had the power of judicial review means that the Court had the right to review acts of Congress by extension and actions of the President. Marshall convinced that the Constitution is the \u201csupreme law of the land” and that the Supreme Court has the final say over the meaning of the Constitution so that means it could overrule the law if the Court found that a law was unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
Yes, I do believe that the court make the right decision in Marbury v. Madison case because it established the Supreme Court’s right of\u00a0judicial review\u00a0and based a precedent for future cases. Judicial evaluate challenged legislation to decide its constitutionality and to abolish any laws they find unconstitutional. In Marshall’s opinion, the Congress should not give the Supreme Court power to issue the order of granting his commission and only the Constitution could so the document said nothing about the Supreme Court that have the power to distribute that order. Furthermore, the Supreme Court could not force Jefferson and Madison to appoint Marbury because it didn\u2019t have the power to do so.\u00a0 Marbury v. Madison case was the\u00a0first time the Supreme Court proved an Act of Congress\u00a0unconstitutional.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
William Marbury is one of the ‘midnight appointees’ contained a complaint with the Supreme Court that they should order Madison to deliver his …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[43],"tags":[84],"class_list":["post-3915","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-free-law-essaysconstitutional-law","tag-us-law"],"yoast_head":"\n