Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

No description

Marco Medina

on 5 December 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803)

The Court Case
Marshall's Three Questions & Answers
1. Has the applicant a right to the commission he demands?
2. If he has a right, and that right has been violated, does the law have a remedy for him?
3. If there is a remedy, is issuing a writ of mandamus the correct remedy?
The Official Results
John Adams' Lame Duck Period
Is it unconstitutional?

Affordable Healthcare Act
Anti-abortion laws
Anti-Sharia laws
State regulation of immigration
Limiting free-speech laws
Gay marriage
Has the applicant a right to the commission he demands?
Yes, he has a right to the commission he demands.
Jeffersonian Response
James Madison, the new Secretary of State under Jefferson, refused to process the appointed positions because Jefferson told him not to.

D.C. Justice of the Peace William Marbury, not so happy with the Federalist, argued that the Supreme Court, under the Judiciary Law of 1789, could grant a writ of mandamus(legal order) which would obligate Madison to make his appointment official.
Based on Jim Harvey's speech structures
Lame Duck- an elected official or group continuing to hold political office during the period between the election and the inauguration of a successor
After losing the election of 1800, John Adams made last minute changes to favor the Federalist Party.
The Judiciary Act of 1801 passed by congress allowed Adams to:
Appoint 16 Judges(aka Midnight Judges) to Circuit Courts
42 Justices of the Peace including William Marbury
Appoint John Marshall as Chief Justice of the S.C.
The Judges
John Marshall
William Paterson
Samuel Chase
Bushrod Washington
Alfred Moore
William Cushing
2 Justices did not participate because of illness
If he has a right, and that right has been violated, does the law have a "remedy" for him?
Since he has a right to his commission, there must be a remedy.
If there is a remedy, is issuing a writ of mandamus the correct remedy?
Judicial Review
According to Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2, President Adams had the right to appoint Marbury to his position which was already approved by the Senate.
"The Government of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will certainly cease to deserve this high appellation if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of a vested legal right." -John Marshall
The court ruled that the Court could not grant the writ because Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789(Congress exceeded its power) was unconstitutional because as it extended to cases of original jurisdiction(the power to bring cases directly to the Supreme Court) which were supposed to be dealt in lower courts.
Votes: 4
Votes: 0
James Madison
William Marbury
The dissenting opinion was written by Chief Justice John Marshall and it stated that "the act establishing the judicial courts of the United States to issue writs of mandamus to public officers" is unconstitutional. The case established judicial review.
Unconstitutionality can be determined by judicial review.
Works Cited
MARBURY v. MADISON. The Oyez Project at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law. 23 November 2013. <http://www.oyez.org/cases/1792-1850/1803/1803_0/>.
"Oyez, Oyez, Oh Yay!: Civics Resources for Texas Students & Teachers." Marbury v. Madison. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://www.texasbar.com/civics/cases/marbury-v-madison.html>.
McBride, Alex. PBS. PBS, n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/antebellum/landmark_marbury.html>.
"Marbury v. Madison: Document J, Unanimous Majority Opinion, Marbury v. Madison, 1803." Bill of Rights Institute. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://billofrightsinstitute.org/blog/2012/10/15/marbury-v-madison-document-j-unanimous-majority-opinion-marbury-v-madison-1803/>.
Holland, Joshua. "6 Crazy, Unconstitutional Laws Right-Wingers Are Blowing Your Money On." Alternet. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://www.alternet.org/story/151033/6_crazy,_unconstitutional_laws_right-wingers_are_blowing_your_money_on?page=0,2>.
Full transcript