Marbury and Madison Case - Paper Example

Introduction

The case about Marbury versus Madison in 1893 established to the United States the principle of judicial review. The federal courts proved their ability to declare the acts from the legislative and executive arm of government unconstitutional. The person who was behind the writing of the unanimous decision was John Marshall, the then Chief Justice. The paper is, therefore premised on confirming whether or not President John Adams appointment of William Marbury as the Justice of Peace in the District of Columbia was valid. The other important discussion will seek to explain why Marbury v. Madison case is of importance in the American political system with the use of an example particularly drawn from the Judicial Review in the Contemporary American politics.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

William Marbury was named in the final hours of President John Adam's administration as one of the people who formed the forty-two justice of the peace on March 2nd, 1801. The Senate later confirmed his nomination on March 3rd; the day also marked the end of President Adam's full day in office. The main issue unfolded when the acting Secretary of State failed in delivering the names of at least four nominees with Marbury being one of them. On March 4th, Thomas Jefferson took over the office and gave an order for the position of the four remaining commissions to be withheld with Marbury going further to sue the then new Secretary of State one James Madison with the aim of obtaining his commission (Gutfeld and Yoram, n.p). The Chief Justice John Marshall still went ahead and denied the petition and even refused to offer an issuance of the writ.

In justifying whether or not President John Adam's appointment of William Marbury as the Justice of Peace in the District of Columbia is valid, it is worth to consider the arguments of John Marshall. First, he recognized that William Marbury and other commissioners were entitled to their positions and the Supreme Court did have powers of issuing the writs of mandamus. Section 13 which is provided in the Judicial Act of 1789 is the only one who opined that such writs may be issued but was widely discussed as one which was unconstitutional (Gutfeld and Yoram, n.p). It was from these grounds that the court ruled that the new President, Thomas Jefferson through his Secretary of State was wrong in preventing William Marbury from taking office as a Justice of Peace in the District of Columbia. He also noted that while the duo was wrong about their decision, the appointment by the Congress and the subsequent signing of the president on Marbury's appointment was not as per the law.

Even though the decision existed, the court had no jurisdiction in the case hence making the decision of Thomas Jefferson unchanged. The other issue which also brought a somewhat difficult situation to decide on the case was on the two conflicting laws, the Judicial Act of 1789 which gave the Supreme Court the power of deciding the case and the Marshall Court which ruled the Judicial Act of 1789 as unconstitutional (Lewis, n.p). It was, therefore, the responsibility of the court to decide which law to use hence Marbury failing to assume office. In consideration of the argued, it is correct to say that the appointment of William Marbury by President John Adams was invalid since the law which was passed by the Congress and signed by the president during his appointment was illegal.

It is equally significant to note that the case of Marbury v. Madison is one who has played an important role in the American political system. It allowed the Supreme Court to empower itself and become the final authority on legality about both the political and government activities. The power is currently well balanced between the judiciary and the executive who is mostly formed by the political class. The landmark of the case also established a principle of judicial review particularly within the political system of the United States of America. The Supreme Court primarily arrogated to itself the power to strike down any legislation like the one that was passed in the Congress and signed by the president provided the legislation is not in line with the constitution. Before the case, there were no alternatives through which laws could be voided on a constitutional basis. The Supreme Court, therefore, had a minor duty within the political arena but this change immediately the ruling on Marbury v. Madison case was decided (Lewis, n.p). In addition to the Supreme Court's strict judicial role, it had its functions extended to taking on overtly political duties.

The case also brought to existence the concept of judicial review where the Supreme Court would be allowed to decide on the constitutionality of the acts drawn from both the executive and the legislative branch. Even though the power was not added to the constitution, John Marshall argued that there was a need for the courts to be made equal to the legislature and the executive. An example in the contemporary American politics that highlights the importance of judicial review is noted on the ability of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States to investigate some of the actions of the sitting president of the land, President Donald Trump. Such investigations on senior government officials and key political players have only been made possible because the Judiciary through the Supreme Court acquired equality to the legislative and executive branch after the Supreme Court issued a ruling on the case of Marbury v. Madison.

Conclusion

In summary, the Supreme Court ruling in Marbury and Madison case acted like a breakthrough to the judicial arm of government. It allowed the judiciary to assume equal powers to the legislature and the executive. The case was also important to the American political system since the allowed for the judicial reviews which took a more overtly role in the political arena as evidenced in the paper.

Works Cited

Gutfeld, Arnon, and Yoram Rabin. "The Judicial Review Controversy: Marbury v. Madison and Its Manifestations in the Israel Constitutional Revolution." (2016).

Lewis, Anthony. Marbury v. Madison v Ashcroft. New York Times. (2003). Print. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/24/opinion/marbury-v-Madison-v-ashcroft.html