On This Day: "Single most important" decision in Supreme Court history issued - Feb. 24, 1803
(edited from Wikipedia)
"
Marbury v. Madison
Marbury v. Madison was a landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court that established the principle of judicial review in the United States, meaning that American courts have the power to strike down laws and statutes they find to violate the Constitution of the United States. Decided in 1803, Marbury is regarded as the single most important decision in American constitutional law.
The Court established that the U.S. Constitution is actual law, not just a statement of political principles and ideals. It also helped define the boundary between the constitutionally separate executive and judicial branches of the federal government.
On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous 4–0 decision against Marbury. The Court's opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
Judicial review in the United States
In the United States, judicial review is the legal power of a court to determine if a statute, treaty, or administrative regulation contradicts or violates the provisions of existing law, a State Constitution, or ultimately the United States Constitution. While the U.S. Constitution does not explicitly define the power of judicial review, the authority for judicial review in the United States has been inferred from the structure, provisions, and history of the Constitution.
In 1803, Marbury v. Madison was the first Supreme Court case where the Court asserted its authority to strike down a law as unconstitutional. At the end of his opinion in this decision, Chief Justice John Marshall maintained that the Supreme Court's responsibility to overturn unconstitutional legislation was a necessary consequence of their sworn oath of office to uphold the Constitution as instructed in Article Six of the Constitution.
[How many Acts and Laws have been struck down]
As of 2014, the United States Supreme Court has held 176 Acts of the U.S. Congress unconstitutional. In the period 1960–2019, the Supreme Court has held 483 laws unconstitutional in whole or in part.
Laws limiting judicial review
Although the Supreme Court continues to review the constitutionality of statutes, Congress and the states retain some power to influence what cases come before the Court. For example, the Constitution at Article III, Section 2, gives Congress power to make exceptions to the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has historically acknowledged that its appellate jurisdiction is defined by Congress, and thus Congress may have power to make some legislative or executive actions unreviewable. This is known as jurisdiction stripping.
Another way for Congress to limit judicial review was tried in January 1868, when a bill was proposed requiring a two-thirds majority of the Court in order to deem any Act of Congress unconstitutional. The bill was approved by the House, 116 to 39. That measure died in the Senate, partly because the bill was unclear about how the bill's own constitutionality would be decided.
Many other bills have been proposed in Congress that would require a supermajority in order for the justices to exercise judicial review. During the early years of the United States, a two-thirds majority was necessary for the Supreme Court to exercise judicial review; because the Court then consisted of six members, a simple majority and a two-thirds majority both required four votes. Currently, the constitutions of two states require a supermajority of supreme court justices in order to exercise judicial review: Nebraska (five out of seven justices) and North Dakota (four out of five justices).
[Summary of Marbury v. Madison]
The case originated in early 1801 as part of the political rivalry between outgoing President John Adams and incoming President Thomas Jefferson.
Adams had lost the U.S. presidential election of 1800 to Jefferson. In March 1801, just two days before his term as president ended, Adams appointed several dozen Federalist Party supporters to new circuit judge and justice of the peace positions in an attempt to frustrate Jefferson and his supporters in the Democratic-Republican Party.
The outgoing U.S. Senate quickly confirmed Adams's appointments, but outgoing Secretary of State John Marshall was unable to deliver all of the new judges' commissions before Adams's departure and Jefferson's inauguration. Jefferson believed the undelivered commissions were void and instructed his Secretary of State, James Madison, not to deliver them.
One of the undelivered commissions belonged to William Marbury, a Maryland businessman who had been a strong supporter of Adams and the Federalists. In late 1801, after Madison had repeatedly refused to deliver his commission, Marbury filed a lawsuit in the Supreme Court asking the Court to issue a writ of mandamus forcing Madison to deliver his commission.
In an opinion written by Marshall, who by then had been appointed Chief Justice of the United States, the Supreme Court held that Madison's refusal to deliver Marbury's commission was illegal. The Court also held that it was normally proper in such situations for a court to order the government official in question to deliver the commission.
In Marbury's case, however, the Court did not order Madison to comply. Examining the law Congress had passed to define Supreme Court jurisdiction over types of cases like Marbury's—Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789—the Court found that the Act had expanded the definition of the Supreme Court's jurisdiction beyond what was originally set forth in the U.S. Constitution.
The Court then struck down Section 13 of the Act, announcing that American courts have the power to invalidate laws that they find to violate the Constitution—a power now known as judicial review. Because striking down the law removed any jurisdiction the Court might have had over the case, the Court could not issue the writ that Marbury had requested.
"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_v._Madison
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_the_United_States
[Why Marbury v. Madison is important]
"
Landmark Cases - Marbury v. Madison (1803)
[The Court ruled that] By extending the Court's original jurisdiction to include cases like Marbury's, Congress had exceeded it authority. And when an act of Congress is in conflict with the Constitution, it is, Marshall said, the obligation of the Court to uphold the Constitution because, by Article VI, it is the "supreme law of the land."
As a result of Marshall's decision Marbury was denied his commission -- which presumably pleased President Jefferson. Jefferson was not pleased with the lecture given him by the Chief Justice, however, nor with Marshall's affirmation of the Court's power to review acts of Congress. For practical strategic reasons, Marshall did not say that the Court was the only interpreter of the Constitution (though he hoped it would be) and he did not say how the Court would enforce its decisions if Congress or the Executive opposed them. But, by his timely assertion of judicial review, the Court began its ascent as an equal branch of government -- an equal in power to the Congress and the president. Throughout its long history, when the Court needed to affirm its legitimacy, it has cited Marshall's opinion in Marbury v. Madison.
"
https://www.thirteen.org/wnet/supremecourt/democracy/landmark_marbury.html
---------------------------------------------------------
On This Day: First major slave revolt in South America starts; grows to 3,000 - Feb. 23, 1763
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016373130
On This Day: Great White Fleet returns home from world-wide trip to demonstrate U.S. power - Feb. 22, 1909
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016373046
On This Day: Russians invade ill-prepared Sweden to take Finland - Feb. 21, 1808
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016373022
On This Day: Big business plays a central role in rise of Nazi party via secret meeting - Feb. 20, 1933
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016372945
On This Day: Betty Friedan draws large numbers of new supporters to feminist cause - Feb. 19, 1963
https://www.democraticunderground.com/1016372915