Con Law

Constitutional Law Class Notes

* Marbury v. Madison

* Marbury v Madison: Marbury was named a justice of the peace at the end of his administration; Madison refused to deliver the commission. Marbury (and colleagues) brought a suit to compel Madison to deliver the commissions.

* · Court held that the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine that the SC has the authority and the duty to declare statutes that conflict with the Constitution as unconstitutional and refuse to enforce them.

* The Constitution reigns supreme because it is created by the sovereign people who came together to ratify it.

* « It's the SC, not Congress, which has the authority and the duty to declare a congressional statute unconstitutional if the Court says it violates the Constitution.

* Background of case was a political struggle between Adams and the Federalists, and his successor Jefferson and the Republicans. Just before leaving office, Adams appointed a number of new judges, including several justices of the peace for the District of Columbia. Commissions for these justices of the peace had been signed by Adams but not yet delivered by the time he left office. The Jefferson Administration then refused to honor the appointments for which the commissions had not actually been delivered prior to the end of Adams’ term.

* Marburry sought a writ of mandamus compelling Jefferson’ Secretary of the State (Madison) to deliver their commission.

* Steps of Marshall’s Argument:

* First, Marshall decided that Marbury and the other justices become entitled to their commissions once they had been signed by the President.

* Second, Marshall decided that Madison’s failure to deliver the commissions entitled the Ps to some sort of remedy.

* He distinguished between political acts, which are not reviewable by the courts, and acts...