Landmark Supreme Court Case · Judicial power
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
- Decided
- 1803
- Vote
- 4–0
- Opinion
- Chief Justice John Marshall
- Constitutional provisions
Facts of the case
In his final days in office, President John Adams appointed dozens of Federalist judges and officials, the so-called "midnight judges." William Marbury was named a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia, but his signed commission was never delivered. The new president, Thomas Jefferson, told Secretary of State James Madison to withhold it. Marbury asked the Supreme Court directly for a writ of mandamus (a court order) forcing Madison to deliver it, relying on Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789.
The constitutional question
Was Marbury entitled to his commission, and did the Supreme Court have the power to order its delivery?
The decision
Marbury had a legal right to the commission, but the Court could not order its delivery. Section 13 of the Judiciary Act tried to add to the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction beyond what Article III allows, so that part of the act was unconstitutional and void.
The Court's reasoning
The Constitution is the supreme, fundamental law. When an ordinary law conflicts with it, courts must follow the Constitution. Because judges must decide cases, it is their duty to determine what the law is, including whether a statute conflicts with the Constitution.
Why it matters
It established judicial review: the power of courts to strike down laws that violate the Constitution. Judicial review made the judiciary a co-equal branch and is a central check on Congress and the president. Marshall gave up a small power, ordering the commission's delivery, to establish a much larger one.
In the Court's words
It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.
Chief Justice John Marshall, majority opinion