Marbury vs. Madison and Judicial Review
When the Constitution was signed in 1787 the story did not end. There were
several disputes and issues that arose because of differing ideas about how the
Constitution would operate. One of these issues resulted in the 1803 Supreme Court
decision Marbury v Madison. The importance of the case was not in how the court ruled,
but in how the decision effected the federal government and how it would operate.
While Washington was President, Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1789, which
set up procedures for establishing justices of the peace and other local judges. It also gave
the Supreme Court broad powers over the selection of judges. At the
very end of his presidency, John Adams had made many federal
appointments or selections of individuals to government positions
under the Judiciary Act. One of these appointments included William
Marbury, a friend of Adams, as justice of the peace in Washington DC.
Thomas Jefferson, the new president, refused to recognize the
appointment of Marbury, in part because Adams and Jefferson were
political enemies. The normal practice of making such appointments
was to deliver a "commission," or official written notice of being selected to fill the
government position. According to the Judiciary Act of 1789, the Secretary of State
normally delivered these. Jefferson's Secretary of State at the time was
James Madison. At the direction of Jefferson, Madison refused to deliver
Marbury's commission. Marbury sued Madison, and the Supreme Court
took the case. The court ruling was not necessarily based on the facts of
the case, but rather certain aspects of the Judiciary Act. Chief Justice
John Marshall and the court ruled that the Supreme Court’s role in the
commission of justices of the peace was unconstitutional because it
gave the Supreme Court authority that was denied it by Article III of the
Constitution. Thus, the Supreme Court said, the Judiciary Act of 1789
was illegal and not to be followed. Therefore, the entire process Adams used to appoint
Marbury was voided. This effectively was a win for Jefferson and Madison, but this is not
why the case is remembered today.
The real significance of this is that it was the first time the Supreme Court struck
down a law because it was unconstitutional. It was the beginning of the practice of
"judicial review." In this case, the Supreme Court said that the
law gave too much power to the Court itself.
The practice of judicial review greatly strengthened the
power of the judicial branch, which had thus far been weaker than
the other two. The constitution was a bit unclear on what types of
things the Supreme Court would do. By establishing judicial review, the court gave itself
its primary function, to review laws and see if they violate the constitution or not. This
has been done several times throughout American history. Some notable examples
include Brown v. Board of Education (1954), in which the Court overturned state laws
permitting racially segregated public schools; Texas v. Johnson (1989), in which the Court
overturned a Texas law prohibiting damage of a US flag; and Weeks v. United States (1914),
which stated that evidence seized in violation of the Constitution cannot be admitted
during a trial.
The practice of judicial review has become an essential part of not
only the Judicial Branch, but also the United States government as a
whole. It is also credited with completing the system of checks and
balances created by the founding
fathers.