Marbury Vs Madison Case Essay

There was a long lame duck period between the November election and the inauguration of a new president, and the Congress that met in December 1800 was the old Congress. The Federalist controlled Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, which created circuit courts of appeal, and relieved the justices of the Supreme Court of their obligation to travel around the country to hear cases. It also increased the jurisdiction of the federal courts. Adams immediately appointed several new judges and the Senate confirmed the 16 new judges to these courts, all Federalists. James Madison was one of the 42 Justices of the Peace that were also created with the Judiciary Act of 1801. These Justices served the Washington and Virginia areas. It is also important to know that all of these Justices were also Federalists. Adams was trying to stack the Judiciary with the outgoing Federalist Party members. Many of these Justices were qualified to hold these jobs however.

The first question raised was about whether or not the Congress had the power to create the bank. The answer was yes, because Congress had the power under the Constitution to incorporate a bank under the Article I Section 8 with the Necessary and Proper Clause which in other words means constitutional. Hence, the bank was constitutional. Second question that was raised during the decision-making was about whether or not the State of Maryland had the power of taxing the bank. The bank is a federal institution created by the Federal Government. According to John Marshall, sovereignty is separated between federal and state governments, but when the state is trying to gain control over the national power the state is trying to take over the supreme sovereignty; under any circumstances the national sovereignty should be supreme. Federal Government represents the people of the United States as a whole; meanwhile the state represents only the people of the state. Marshall also noted that the Government of the Union, though limited in its powers, is supreme within its sphere of action, and its laws, when made in pursuance of the Constitution, form the supreme law of the land. Marshall’s words were: “ The power of establishing a corporation is not a distinct sovereign power or end of government, but only the means of

During 1816 Congress chartered The Second Bank of the United States. Two year later in 1818, the state of Maryland passed legislation to impose taxes on the bank. The cashier of the Baltimore branch of the bank, James W. McCulloch, refused to pay the tax. An unanimous decision, the Court held that Congress had the power to incorporate the bank and that Maryland could not tax instruments of the national government employed in the execution of constitutional powers. Chief Justice Marshall noted that Congress possessed unremunerated powers not explicitly outlined in the Constitution. Marshall also held that while the states retained the power of taxation, "the constitution and the laws made in pursuance thereof are supreme.. they control the constitution

In the supreme court decision that was made with the McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), the second bank of the United States, Maryland had placed a prohibitive tax on the bank notes. In a branch of the second bank Maryland attempted to impede the operation. This case McCulloch v. Maryland had established two important principles in Constitutional law. The first important thing that it applied was the constitution implied powers for implementing the constitution's express powers, in order to create a functional national government. The second important reason was to state action may not impede valid constitutional exercises of power by the federal government. James William McCulloch refused to pay the tax and was appealed to Maryland court because of this and this had begun the trial.

Was an argument between McCulloch vs Maryland. The argument was a battle between whether the constitution allows a national government to run a bank. As well as does the constitution allow state governments to tax a national bank operating within its borders? However the Supreme Court ruled in favor of banks being able to be built and run by the national government. However they ruled that state governments are unable to tax a national bank that is within their borders.

In Marbury v. Madison in 1803, Marshall overturned an act of congress for the first time that conflicted with the constitution. It was a daring step for a politically vulnerable court and Marshall crafted the opinion in such a way that Thomas Jefferson could not reject it. John Marshall had strong views that made him dominate the court from 1801 to 1835 and personally responsible for evaluating it in person of real authority. Marshall, also shared his power with other follow Justices that often curved his opinions in order to arrive at consensus decisions. Marshall established a model that all future Chief Justices would be measured to. The United States Supreme Court used the Necessary and Proper Clause in the McCulloch v. Maryland case. McCulloch v. Maryland case debated that if congress have the power to charter a bank. In 1791, the first charted bank; the First Bank of the United States was created, but the

Marbury vs. Madison opened up a considerable measure of debate around the United States because of supreme courts judicial review. It was the main ever official siting of a judicial review, it's so big in light of the fact that it gives the supreme court the capacity to void acts that appear to be illegal. William Marbury was named justice of the peace in the District of Columbia in the last hours of Adams organization. Marbury needed the courts to issue a mandamus that would disclose to James Madison to convey his bonus as Justice of the Peace. This is big for us in light of the fact that the courts can ensure the constitution is being taken after and nobody goes a path outside of it.

During the trial of McCulloch v. Maryland, Maryland believed it had the power to tax the national bank, as stated in 1819, based off the “elastic” clause (Document C). However, Chief Justice John Marshall denied Maryland the right to tax the bank and destroyed the ideal of implied powers. This was a major blow to state’s rights as they believed that since they make up the government, they should be able to review actions from the federal government. Upon Marshall’s decision, state’s rights weakened and the federal government grew stronger. Next, an illustration of population density in the year 1820 is shown (Document E).

In the face of attacks on the judiciary launched by Jefferson and his followers, Marshall needed to make a strong statement to maintain the status of Supreme Court as the head of what they were calling a “co-equal branch of government.” By asserting the power to declare acts of an unconstitutional Congress, Marshall claimed for the court a paramount position as interpreter of the Constitution. Although Marbury v. Madison set an abiding precedent for the court’s power in that area, it did not end the debate over the court’s enacting part of the statute, which has continued for more than two centuries. In fact, it is likely that the issue will never be fully resolved. But the fact remains that the court has claimed and exercised the power of judicial review through most of U.S. history.

Madison case regarding the role of the judiciary branch. The decision in the Marbury v. Madison case granted the judiciary branch the power of judicial review to strike down laws that appear unconstitutional. In declaring that the re-chartering of a national bank was unconstitutional, in other words, Jackson undermine the authority of the judiciary branch, for his bank veto sent out the message that he reserved the right to question a Supreme Court decision if he thought such decision would injure the nation. In a sense, by altering the relationship with the legislative and usurping the judging power of the judiciary, Jackson’s veto of the national bank greatly contributed to the expansion of presidential boundary by giving the president the power to dominate both the legislative branch and the judiciary branch. In the aftermath of the bank veto episode, Jackson, using the newly expanded presidential power, introduced the spoil system into the government personnel practices.

The Court’s final decision was unanimous and it denied Marbury’s request for the writ of mandamus. Marbury never received his appointment. This case is significant because it established the concept of judicial review. The Constitution does not specifically grant the judiciary this power. Judicial review allows federal courts to review laws and determine if they are constitutional or not. This gives the judiciary the power to void any laws that are found to violate any part of the Constitution. Therefore, Chief Justice John Marshall ruled that the portion of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that gave the federal courts the authority to hear mandamus cases was unconstitutional. Ironically, Chief Justice Marshall is the person who was the Secretary of State under Adams that sealed Marbury’s appointment.

In addition to saving the integrity of the Federalist-dominated Supreme Court in the case of Marbury v. Madison, John Marshall also promoted certain Federalist principles, including the idea of a strong national government. From the years when the Constitution was being created, Alexander Hamilton fought for the creation of a national bank since he believed it was “necessary and proper” for the growth and development of the United States (“The Marshall Court”). As Hamilton and the Federalist Party had hoped, a national bank was created and one of its branches was placed in Baltimore, Maryland. State legislators from Maryland were not satisfied with the progress the bank was making because the negligent behavior of its bank officials was bringing the bank under (Newmyer, 295). To save their citizens from having to deal with the bank’s faulty leadership, the legislators attempted to drive the branch out of the state by placing a tax on all the banknotes issued by the bank. When the tax was purposely left unpaid, Maryland sued the cashier of the bank--James McCulloch. In the state courts, Maryland won its case,

The Constitution pays a massive role in court decisions both in the federal and state cases. If the State Supreme Court cannot come to a decision on a case, the case will be turned over to the Supreme Court who has the final authority in interpreting the meaning of the Constitution in any case. The courts also have the power of judicial review—to declare a law unconstitutional. Due to the decision of Chief Justice John Marshall the Supreme Court has this power from the case of Marbury v. Madison in 1801. The case Marbury v. Madison took place during the election of 1800 when Thomas Jefferson defeated President John Adams, but the new administration did not take office until March of 1801. When the new administration took office James Madison (Secretary of State) discovered that some commissions were not delivered. One of the people whose commission had not been received

The overall influence of the Supreme Court under John Marshall can be understood through the five main court cases over which he presided; Marbury v. Madison (1803), Fletcher v. Peck (1810), Dartmouth College v. Woodward (1819), McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), and Gibbons v. Ogden (1824). The first significant case Marshall was faced with was Marbury v. Madison in 1803. In the last few days of his presidency, John Adams appointed members of the Federalist Party to the new offices he created within the judicial branch. When Thomas Jefferson took office he told James Madison, his secretary of state, not to deliver the unsent commissions to some of the “midnight appointments”, one of who was William Marbury. He appealed to the Supreme Court, asking for a court order that would require Madison to send out the commission, which was part of his job. The Judiciary Act of 1789 supported Marbury’s demands because it authorized the Supreme Court to order

However, the state of Maryland tried to block the activity of the national bank by imposing tax to all the notes that were issued. The branch manager of the bank in Baltimore refused to pay taxes and lawsuits were filed in the Maryland Court. However, the case was brought up to the U.S Supreme Court as the Constitution did not subjectively describe that Federal Government had the authority to establish a bank. The U.S Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John Marshall ruled out the case that acknowledges that the Congress has the rights to establish a national bank under Article 1 Section 8 in the American Constitution. This shows that the US Constitution was vaguely described and gave the Congress an insight to pass laws as long as it is within the Constitution. However, this gave the Federal Government to create the mentality to indirectly gain more power which restricts the States sovereignty.