On February 24, 1803, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous 4–0 decision against William Marbury, meaning he did not win his petition to receive his judicial commission. While Marbury lost his direct case, the landmark ruling ultimately established the significant principle of judicial review, solidifying the Supreme Court's power within the U.S. government.
The Court's Decision Against Marbury
The case of Marbury v. Madison centered on William Marbury, one of the "midnight judges" appointed by President John Adams in the final hours of his presidency. Although his commission was signed and sealed, it was not delivered before Thomas Jefferson became president. Jefferson's Secretary of State, James Madison, refused to deliver the commission. Marbury then petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of mandamus, an order compelling Madison to deliver the commission.
Under Chief Justice John Marshall, the Supreme Court faced a delicate political situation. Marshall structured the Court's opinion by addressing three key questions:
- Did Marbury have a right to his commission? The Court affirmed that Marbury did have a legal right to the commission once it was signed and sealed.
- If he had a right and that right was violated, did the law provide him a remedy? The Court determined that the law did provide a remedy for such a violation.
- Was the appropriate remedy a writ of mandamus issued by the Supreme Court? This was the pivotal question.
While Marbury had a right and a remedy, the Court ultimately ruled that it did not have the original jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus in this case. The Judiciary Act of 1789 had granted the Supreme Court such power, but Chief Justice Marshall declared that specific part of the Act unconstitutional because it expanded the Court's original jurisdiction beyond what was defined in Article III of the Constitution.
The Broader "Winner": Judicial Review
Although Marbury lost his immediate claim, the decision is widely considered a monumental "win" for the Supreme Court itself and for the establishment of the American system of checks and balances. By declaring an act of Congress unconstitutional, the Court asserted its authority of judicial review.
This power means that the judicial branch can:
- Review laws passed by Congress.
- Review actions taken by the Executive Branch.
- Determine if these laws or actions violate the U.S. Constitution.
- Strike down any that are found to be unconstitutional.
Key Outcomes of the Ruling:
| Aspect | Outcome |
|---|---|
| Marbury's Claim | Lost; his request for a writ of mandamus was denied. |
| James Madison | Did not have to deliver the commission. |
| Chief Justice John Marshall | Solidified his legacy and the power of the Supreme Court. |
| U.S. Government | The principle of judicial review was formally established, balancing power among the three branches. |
This precedent cemented the judiciary as a co-equal branch of government, capable of interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that legislative and executive actions comply with it. The ruling in Marbury v. Madison remains a cornerstone of American constitutional law.
