Marbury V. Madison: The First Supreme
Court Case
On February 24, 1803, the first and most influential supreme court
case of America occurred. This case lives in obscurity to most citizens,
but without it, the Supreme Court would not have the power it has
today. The issue of the case arose from a seemingly simple dispute. It
all began during the Election of 1800. When incumbent president
John Adams was voted out of office, he created a scheme to keep his
party, the Federalists, in control of one of the branches of the
government. Adams promoted many Federalists to become circuit
judges and justices of peace. This way, the Federalist party could
control the Judicial Branch of the government. However, one man that
was promised a commission, William Marbury, never received one
before Jefferson came into office. Jefferson declared the commission
void and told his Secretary of State, James Madison, to not deliver the
commission. Marbury sued Madison, and the court case began. The
Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison changed America for the
better because it established the principle of judicial review, increased
the power of the Supreme Court, and protected the rights of citizens.
First of all, the case created the principle of judicial review. Judicial
review states that the Supreme Court can declare an act of the
government “unconstitutional”. This gave the Supreme Court power,
and proved that the Judicial branch was a separate entity from the
other branches. This principle arose from the court case itself. When
the case was brought to the Supreme Court, Marshall realized
something. The law Congress passed which allowed the Supreme
Court to review this case expanded the power of the Supreme Court
beyond what was specified in the Constitution. Marshall realized that
went against the Constitution, and struck down that part of the law,
creating the first example of judicial review. In Marshall’s own words,
“The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and that those
limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written.”
Due to the fact that the Supreme Court no longer had jurisdiction of
this case, the Supreme Court could not make Madison deliver
Marbury’s commission.
Along with a legal problem, the case created a great political dilemma
for Marshall. Ruling with Marbury and asking Madison and Jefferson
to deliver Marbury’s commission would appear weak, because
Madison and Jefferson could just as easily ignore the order. This
would be a crippling blow to the new court, who needed to appear
strong and powerful. However, by siding with Madison, Marshall, a
Federalist, would be handing Jefferson and Madison,
Democratic-Republicans, a free victory, and would look like the
Supreme Court was backing down. Marshall’s next decision is
single-handedly the most important legal decision in the history of the
United States.
Marshall, figured out a way that the Supreme Court didn’t have to
make a decision on the case. Section 13 of the Judiciary Act, the act
that allowed the case to take place, expanded the role of the Supreme
Court beyond what was specified in the Constitution. Declaring the act
unconstitutional, Marshall ended Marbury v. Madison due to the fact
that the case was beyond the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. In the
words of political historian Robert McCloskey, “[Marbury v. Madison]
is a masterwork of indirection, a brilliant example of Marshall’s
capacity to sidestep danger while seeming to court it.”
Marbury v. Madison also increased the power of the Supreme Court
tremendously. By setting the precedent of allowing the Supreme Court
to strike down acts of the government, Marshall single-handedly set
apart the Supreme Court from other branches of the government. This
allowed for the Supreme Court to strike down acts of the government
that could potentially harm the citizens of America. This power,
however, has not gone without backlash. One argument is that the
courts sometimes do not represent the beliefs of the people because
judges are not elected. This goes against the principle of democracy.
As Jeremy Waldron said in the Yale Law Journal, “Second, it argues
that, quite apart from the outcomes it generates, judicial review is
democratically illegitimate.” Waldron also states that the people may
not be better off with the Supreme Court, as there is no guarantee that
the Court would be any better than any political institution, such as
Congress. In his words, “…it argues that there is no reason to suppose
that rights are better protected by this practice than they would be by
democratic legislatures.” However, it is hard for many lawyers and
jurists to argue with Marshall’s statement in his verdict, “that a law
repugnant to the constitution is void, and that courts, as well as other
departments, are bound by that instrument.” This shows the power of
judicial review as being able to strike down pretty much any law to
protect citizens.
Arguably the most famous example of judicial review protecting the
rights of citizens is the landmark case Brown v. Board of Education.
Brown v. Board of Education was a landmark decision by the Supreme
Court of the United States that outlawed racial segregation in very
public schools. The case generally was filed on behalf of Linda Brown,
an African-American girl who had to walk six blocks to her school bus
stop in order to get to her segregated black school while white children
were able to mostly walk to their school bus stop right outside their
homes. The court ruled unanimously that “separate educational
facilities are inherently unequal.” The Brown v Board of Education
case is one of the most important cases in US history because it
overturned the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson decision, which had allowed
for “separate but equal” facilities for African Americans and whites,
paving the way for integration across all aspects of American life in a
big way. This court case was a great example of judicial review,
because it protected the rights and quality of life of African-Americans.
Another example of judicial review is the court case Miranda v.
Arizona. Miranda v. Arizona is a landmark decision by the Supreme
Court of the United States. It is one of the most influential cases in
American history and has shaped modern law enforcement practices
in the US. The case revolved around Ernesto Miranda, who was
arrested on March 13, 1963, for kidnapping and rape in Phoenix,
Arizona. The court ruled that Miranda’s confession could not be used
as evidence because he had not been informed of his rights. The court
ruled 5–4 that Miranda’s confession should not have been admitted as
evidence because he had not been informed of his right to remain
silent or have an attorney present during questioning. The case was
brought to the Supreme Court by Ernesto Miranda, who had been
convicted of kidnapping and rape based on his confession, which he
later claimed was coerced. The court ruled that Miranda’s Fifth
Amendment right to due process had been violated because he had not
been informed of his right to remain silent or have an attorney present
during questioning. The Supreme Court ruled that statements made
by a person to police officers after being taken into custody are
admissible as evidence in court only if the person was first informed of
their Constitutional rights, which are: (1) to remain silent; (2) to have
an attorney present during questioning; and (3) to be free from
self-incrimination. These are a few examples of how judicial review
protects the rights of citizens.
To sum it all up, Marbury v. Madison changed America for the better
by creating the principle of judicial review, increased the power of the
Supreme Court, and protected the rights of citizens. Judicial review
was created to prevent the Supreme Court from making a difficult
decision that would either give a win to the opposing political party or
make the court seem weak. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court
to strike down an act of the government due to the act violating the
Constitution. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court more power,
and with that power, the Supreme Court protects the rights of citizens.
Should the Supreme Court have this much power?