Marbury v. Madison Case Summary

Background

• Case Name: William Marbury v. James Madison, Secretary of State of the United States
• Court: Supreme Court of the United States
• Citation: 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

Key Points

Issues Considered by the Court

1. Right to Commission:

   • Does Marbury have a right to the commission he demands?
   • Marbury's right originates from an Act of Congress (February 1801).
   • Commission signed by President John Adams but was never delivered.

2. Legal Remedy:

   • If Marbury's right has been violated, do the laws provide a remedy?
   • The essence of civil liberty includes the right to legal protection when injured.
   • Government of the United States described as a government of laws, not men.

3. Mandamus Appropriateness:

   • Is a mandamus from the court a proper remedy for Marbury?

Court's Examination

• Appointment Process:

  • The process involves the President's nomination, Senate's advice and consent, and commission issuance.
  • Distinction between appointment and commission: Appointment is complete upon the President's signature.
  • Commission is evidence of appointment but not constitutive of it.

• Legal Rights and Duties:

  • Completion of commission involves sealing by the Secretary of State.
  • Executive discretion ends after appointment; office rights are vested in appointee.
  • Withholding the commission is a violation of vested legal rights.

Legal Principles Established

• Judicial Review:

  • Basis for judiciary's power to review laws and actions for constitutionality.
  • Constitution is paramount law; courts must ensure laws comply.

• Role of the Judiciary:

  • It is the duty of the judicial system to interpret laws and resolve conflicts between laws and the Constitution.

Decision

• Outcome:
  • Marbury was entitled to the commission, but the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to issue a mandamus compelling its delivery.
  • The Judiciary Act provision allowing the Supreme Court to issue mandamus was found unconstitutional, establishing the precedent for judicial review.

Conclusion

• Impact:
  • First case to apply the principle of judicial review.
  • Established the judiciary as an independent branch of government capable of nullifying legislative acts violating the Constitution.