Marbury+v.+Madison

__makelonger **?????** __

1. Case Title
 * William Marbury v. James Madison, Secretary of State, United States**

2. Date of hearing February Tenth, 1803

3. Chief Justice and brief biographical sketch The Chief Justice was John Marshall. Marshall later became the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and a famous judge. Marshall had a great impact on America and the Constitution. He made the Supreme Court a coequal branch of government and was Secretary of State under John Adams. He was in the House of Representatives for one year. **Anything else??**

4. Documents or amendments to the Constituion relevant to the case The Judiciary Act of 1789 and Article III, Section 1 were relevant to the case __elaborate judiciary act & presidenticial power does new president overrule old one?__ **__Huh?__**

5. Summary of the case / analysis in your own words Right before the end of his presidential term, President John Adams appointed forty two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia. These commissions were signed by President Adams and sealed by the Secretary of State John Marshall. However, they were not delivered before the end of Adams’ term as president. The new president, Thomas Jefferson, refused to honor the commissions. He claimed they don't count because they were not delivered before the end of Adams' presidency. William Marbury was an recipient of this commission as one of the justices of the peace. He petitioned the Supreme Court in order to force the New Secretary of State, James Madison to deliver the commissions. He intended to use the writ of mandamus which is "issued by a superior court to compel a lower court or a government officer to perform mandatory or purely ministerial duties correctly." However, the Court, though agreeing that Madison's refusal to deliver the commissions was wrong, however, they were unable to force the delivery with the writ of mandamus because that clause in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which allowed Marbury to take his claim to the Supreme Court, was actually unconstitutional. The petition was therefore denied. **who's he? How about this guy over to the right? ->** 6. Main / argument of the case? Does Marbury have a right to the commission? Does the law grant Marbury a remedy? Does the Supreme Court have the authority to review acts of Congress **(and other people like lower courts and the Prez)** and determine whether they are unconstitutional and therefore void?

7. Decision rendered by the court plus the vote The Court rendered a unanimous (4–0) decision, that Marbury had the right to his commission but the court did not have the power to force Madison to deliver the commission.

8. Who voted what, disserting, and why? On February, 24 1803 the supreme court ruled that Madison could not be forced to deliver the commissions. The Supreme Court had the power to dismiss __Marbury s__ argument because of The Judiciary Act of 1789. It gave the court jurisdiction over the Writs of Mandamus. John Marshall based his decision on many different factors but the most important was made because he was bound to follow the constitution which agreed with the principle of judicial review.

9. Who were members of the court at that time and how long on the court? The justices of the court were,Samuel Chase, William Cushing, Chief Justice John Marshall, William Paterson, Bushrod Washington. **(this is five guys, shouldn't the vote be 5-1?)** They were all for the court which meant that they agreed with the decision. There was one justice dissenting, Alfred Moore, but he did not participate. the dissenting justice disagreed with the decision of the majority. normally the dissenting would state why they disagreed and their opinion would be considered in the final decision. **O.k., so why didn't he participate? Why did he disagree?**

10. What is your personal opinion of the case? Explain. I think Marbury vs. Madison is one of the most important and influential cases brought to the Supreme Court. It established judicial review, which gave the Supreme Court the power to review the constitutionality of acts or laws passed by congress. Without judicial review many unconstitutional acts and laws could be in place today.

11. What if this case had gone the other way? If the case had gone the other way a system of "checks and balances" would not have been created to prevent any one branch of the Federal Government from becoming too powerful. if it had had been ruled unconstitutional it never would have become a major step and essential piece to the legal system in place today.

Sources:
 *  "Marbury v. Madison – Case Brief Summary." // Lawnix // . Lawnix. Web. 03 Feb. 2012. .
 * Lawrson, Thomas J. "Marbury v. Madison – Case Brief Summary." //Lawnix - Law Resources and Legal Information//. Lawnix, 11 Aug. 2001. Web. 23 Jan. 2012. [].
 *  Little, Charles Warren. "Marbury v. Madison." // Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia // . Web. 03 Feb. 2012. .
 *  "Our Documents - Home." //Welcome to OurDocuments.gov // . Web. 03 Feb. 2012. .

6/7 Biblio - alphabetical! 23/28 Content - unclear on some things like the vote and the reasons for the rulings / non-participation. 4.5/5 Organization - who are these guys? Sure, I know one is Adams, the other Madison, and I'm guessing the 3rd guy (next to Adams) is Marbury, but they should be labeled.

33.5/40 Total