Mark Negus

US Gov.
Legg
Due 4/21/22
Stephon Marbury v Madison Square Garden

A) In 1800, President John Adams ran for president with the Federalist party against

Thomas Jefferson, his VP, who was with the Democratic Republican party. Adams lost,

and was set to relinquish power in early March. Days before he was set to leave office,

Adams expanded the amount of Federal Judiciaries and appointed 16 new “midnight”

judges and 42 Justices of the Peace that would be sympathetic to Federalist ideas to the

Federal Judiciary (2/3). Additionally, Adams appointed John Marshall, his Secretary of

State, to be the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (4). Among the new appointees was

William Marbury, who became a Justice of the Peace. Marbury never received his

commission before Adams left office. It was John Marshall’s (Secretary of State job,

Marshall was briefly serving as Chief Justice too) office's job to oversee the delivery of

commissions like this. When Jefferson took office on March 4th of 1801, it became his

Secretary of State’s (James Madison) job to get Marbury’s commission delivered.

Jefferson however, did not want to give the commission to Marbury, as that would make

him legally valid, and said that the commission (and others) was void because it had

never been delivered. Marbury invoked a Writ of Mandamus, to get Marshall to deliver

his commission. A Writ of Mandamus is defined as a “is an order from a court to an

inferior government official ordering the government official to properly fulfill their official

duties or correct an abuse of discretion” and is an “extraordinary” measure (5).

B) In Jefferson’s day, inauguration day was March 4th, however, the 20th Amendment

made inauguration day on January 20th (6). The superficial reason for this March 4th

date is seemingly tradition and the fact that it was very hard to travel in winter months.

However, in 1922, Nebraska Senator George Norris suggested the 20th Amendment,
 which would move the date back, as travel had become modernized and easy. More

importantly, these extra months of presidency before the 20th amendment were by no

means insignificant, and a president who had lost reelection, could essentially govern

without responsibility or care for the voters who elected a new president (7). Even if this

likely scenario does not occur, the current president’s still sit as “lame ducks'' who are

still impeding the work of the elected president for months.

C) Judicial Review is the idea that the actions of the government in the executive,

legislative, and administrative branches are reviewed by the Supreme Court to decide if

they are congruent with the constitution (8). This idea was solidified in Marbury v

Madison. While judicial review had been applied a few times before M. v. M., it had not

been used as firmly and frankly until M. v. M, where for the first time, an act of Congress

was deemed unconstitutional (10). Marshall directly affirmed judicial review, saying: “It is

emphatically the duty of the Judicial Department, to say what the law is.” (9).

D) As defined earlier, a Writ of Mandamus is a “is an order from a court to an inferior

government official ordering the government official to properly fulfill their official duties

or correct an abuse of discretion” and is an “extraordinary” measure (5). It's important to

understand the kinds of scope outlined in section 3 of the Constitution that are at play.

“Original jurisdiction is the right of a court to hear a case for the first time. It can be

distinguished from appellate jurisdiction which is the right of a court to review a case that

has already been heard and decided upon by a lower court” (11). The law which allowed

the Writ of Mandamus to be applied here, the Judiciary Act of 1789, was challenged by

Marshall, who concluded that Congress was exerting power it did not have (12). This

was because Marshall cited Article III of the Constitution, which said original jurisdiction

was only applicable: in cases “affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and

Consuls'' or in cases “in which a State shall be Party.” which obviously went against the

Judiciary Act of 1789. The Writ of Mandamus was denied because Marshall deemed the
 case beyond the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which contradicted the

Judiciary Act of 1789 which said that the Supreme Court could issue Writs of Mandamus

in original jurisdiction cases. Marbury was neither a “state” nor an “ambassador” and

Madison was a cabinet secretary, so Marshall decided that Marbury would not get his

commission and that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional and therefore null

and void (14).

E) By having the Judicial Branch interpret the Constitution and deem an act of one of the

other branches to be unconstitutional, this case is one of the most important ever.

Judicial review was recognized as the precedent (in 1895 (15)) from this case and is a

fundamental idea for the Judicial Branch. This case was a clear example of how checks

and balances should work and set the Judicial branch to be truly equal to the others

(10). This case also had a massive effect on the Civil War, as the next time a law was

taken down by the Supreme Court was in the case of Dred Scott v. Sandford which

undid the Missouri Compromise (14). Judicial Review is said to function not only: “ as a

limitation of governmental power, but also as a means for protecting individual rights and

liberties from the excesses of representative democracy and the tyranny of its ephemeral

popular majorities." (16)

F) The irony of this case is that using the Constitution, Marshall dismantles the Writ of

Mandamus attempt and in doing so, establishes Judicial Review that will evaluate the

constitutionality for cases to come, yet Judicial Review is never mentioned in the

Constitution. Additionally, Marshall had “steadfast emphasis” upon “distinction” between

law and politics. Judicial Review in his case directly correlated law with politics and set

the precedent for it to happen in the future (16).Furthermore, Marshall, who again, was

apparently trying to keep politics out of high court, “deftly carved a set of legal issues

from the political circumstances of the case in order to assert the importance of the Court

in matters of constitutional interpretation” (16).

 Works Cited

1. United States presidential election of 1800

https://www.britannica.com/event/United-States-presidential-election-of-1800

2. Marbury v Madison Case Brief Summary

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yaeri3mD7EU

3. Marbury v. Madison
https://www.oyez.org/cases/1789-1850/5us137

4. John Marshall
https://www.britannica.com/biography/John-Marshall

5. Mandamus
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/mandamus

6. Inauguration of the President of the United States

https://www.usa.gov/inauguration#:~:text=Inauguration%20Day%20occurs%20ev
ery%20four,Capitol%20building%20in%20Washington%2C%20DC.

7. The Importance of the 20th Amendment to the us Constitution

https://indiantiger.org/the-importance-of-the-20th-amendment-to-the-us-constituti
on/

8. Judicial Review
https://www.britannica.com/topic/judicial-review

9. Marbury v. Madison and the independent Supreme Court

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/blog/marbury-v-madison-and
-the-independent-supreme-court

10. Two Centuries Later: The Enduring Legacy of Marbury v. Madison (1803)
https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/judicial-review.pdf

11. Original Jurisdiction

 https://ballotpedia.org/Original_jurisdiction#:~:text=Original%20jurisdiction%20is
%20the%20right,upon%20by%20a%20lower%20court.

12. Marbury v. Madison: The Supreme Court claims its power

https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/marbury-v-madison-the-supreme-court-claims-i
ts-power

13. Marbury v. Madison, EXPLAINED [AP Gov Required Cases]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBvUFlqlsyk

14. Dred Scott Decision

https://www.britannica.com/event/Dred-Scott-decision

15. Marbury v. Madison Case Summary: What You Need to Know

https://supreme.findlaw.com/supreme-court-insights/marbury-v--madison-case-su
mmary--what-you-need-to-know.html

16. Reflections Upon Judicial Independence As We Approach The Bicentennial of Marbury

v. Madison: Safeguarding the Constitution's "Crown Jewel"
https://repository.law.uic.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1406&context=lawrevie
w