Summary Of Marbury Vs Madison Case Brief

419 Words2 Pages

Case: Marbury v. Madison
Citation: 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803)
Vote: 4 to 0

Facts: In 1800, Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams. Before Adams last day in office, he appointed several justices of the peace. These justices were approved by the senate and president. The commissions were not delivered because when Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801 he ordered his secretary of state, James Madision, not to make any deliveries. William Marbury, who was suppose to be appointed, petitioned for a writ of mandamus from the Supreme Court to find have Madison show why he should not receive his commission.

Issue(s): (1) Did Marbury have legal right to the writ he petitioned for? (2) Did Marbury have right to his commission? (3) Did …show more content…

Denying his right would be violating his right already given to him through his legal commission. (2) William Marbury did have right to his commission. He was rightfully appointed. The commission needed a seal, signature, and to be delivered to Marbury by a secretary of state or similar individual from the same office. The commission had the signature from the President of the United States, who was empowered by congress to make the appointment. The commission should have been delivered. (3) The Supreme Court’s authority to issue the writ of mandamus is derived from the constitution which outlines the court’s jurisdiction: both original and appellate. The Chief Justice ruled that the court could not grant the writ due to section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789. The act allowed the Supreme Court to grant such an act, but only as long as it was under original jurisdiction. Extending the jurisdiction to cases like Marbury’s exceeded original jurisdiction. Dissenting opinion(s):

Open Document