The Court Case Of Marbury V. Plessy V Ferguson

In the year 1803 the case of Marbury v. Madison was brought before the Supreme Court in order to address the issue of William Marbury’s appointment as federal circuit judge. This created a unique and complex challenge for the Supreme Court of the time because they were operating under no legal precedent, which meant that they had no prior cases to reference to reach a ruling. The issue came to a head after the Judiciary Act of 1801 allowed for President John Adams to appoint sixteen new circuit judges one of them being William Marbury. However, before Secretary of State Marshall ran out of time before he was able to deliver Marbury’s appointment. When the new Secretary of State James Madison entered office, he refused to deliver Marbury’s appointment, claiming that it was too late. Outraged, Marbury filed a writ of mandamus against Madison in order to force him to complete the specified action, which in this case was to deliver the commission. However, through complex political maneuvering the Judiciary Act of 1802, was enacted which repealed the Judiciary Act of 1801 reestablishing the Judiciary Act of 1789 and postponing the case until 1803. One of the key issues in the case was then if William Marbury was entitled to a remedy for the deprivation of his right to his commission. Chief Justice John Marshall with a narrow and technical ruling then determined that since President Adams with his signature had completed Marbury’s commission of appointment he was entitled to the

In order to show how the “separate but equal” doctrine came to be, as a class we created a mock trial of the Plessy v. Ferguson case. The idea of separate but equal allowed states to segregate black and white people through public services and accommodations for over 60 years. Despite this idea of equality in the doctrine, many people took advantage of it, as it gave both black and white people an influence on whether they were inferior or superior.

The landmark case of Plessy v. Ferguson is a Constitutional case in which it had to be decided who the constitution meant when it said "all men are created equal." This case is very important to our constitution and to the people being governed by the constitution because it brought up issues that hadn't been discussed in the U.S before. This case shows the degree of federalism and how much the government paid attention to it. The amendments in the constitution do not apply to a simple race or ethnicity. Throughout history laws have been made and destroyed at the cost of colored people, in the Plessy v. Ferguson case it is shown that due to the thirteenth and fourteenth amendments all citizens have equal protection under the law. Plessy was denied his right, as well as other colored people because they belonged to different bathrooms, they belonged to different train cars and they belonged to different water fountains at this time in history, but Plessy'

In the late 1800’s, a series of racial policies went into effect known as the Jim Crow Laws. These laws enforced separate but equal treatment among African Americans and Whites. Established by the use of separate facilities such as, schools, hotels, restaurants, restrooms and transportation, many of us know and understand Jim Crow Laws by one word, “Segregation”. Jim Crow Laws were upheld by the government during the Plessy vs. Ferguson case and were cemented through acts of terror by the people who opposed. Although slavery had been abolished, African Americans were still stripped of their civil rights, which is intended to protect citizens from discrimination by the government and people.

The 1920’s, was a decade of change, when Americans owned cars, radios and other electronics for the first time. The cars brought great transportation and the need for new roads. The radio brought music and entertainment to all. Electronics became a wide phenomenon where it helped with things from transportation to cooking. The 1920’s was a new era which brought immense change to Americans but after WWI, the nation suffered with strikes and a targeted upon communists and foreigners. This was also the time of the red scare. The Red Scare had begun following the Bolshevik Russian Revolution of 1917; a nationwide fear of communists, socialists and anarchists.

The struggle for equality has existed throughout history. The color of a person’s skin seems to depict everything about them. Not only was this an issue in earlier times, but the present as well. The battle to overcome inequity was made significantly more troublesome in the Plessy v. Ferguson case of 1896.

In the Marbury Vs. Madison’s case Justice John Marshall represented the case and I strongly believe that his points were solid and worth to be granted true and rational. John Marshall’s argument is that the acts of Congress in conflict with the Constitution are not laws and therefore are not progressed into law to the courts, and ultimately the judicial boards’ first responsibility is always to practice and to make firm of the Constitution.

Laws are created among society to maintain order, keeping the communities safe and controlled. In To Kill a Mockingbird, the trial of Tom Robinson is a textbook example of how law creates order among society. When Tom was accused of rape, he was taken to a court of law and prosecuted for the laws that he had broken. Atticus states, “There is one human institution that makes a pauper the equal of a Rockefeller… that institution gentlemen, is a court.” pg 274 When Atticus says that he is expressing that legally all men are equal in the court of law, and men that are proven guilty are demanded to serve the punishment that has been given to them. This shows that law is the ultimate decider over the people, and that the people should respect the law because it upholds the regulations of the nation.

The United States of America is a country that was founded on the idea that all citizens would have equal rights and freedoms. For the protection of the people, and to maintain order, law has been developed over time. Rights advocates are constantly pushing the boundaries of what the law should, or should not be. Individual-rights and public-order advocates are in a battle of balance, leaving the justice system to decide what the best solution is for all.

During the last days of the John Adams Presidency he nominated William Marbury for a position for Justice of the Peace. Everything from paperwork and all the necessary procedures were set for the appointment of William Marbury. But President Adam’s secretary, John Marshall did not deliver the commission in time before Thomas Jefferson became president. During Jefferson Presidency he ordered his secretary James Madison not to deliver the commissions and those men whose commissions were not delivered ended up suing Madison.

Racism has been a part of our country since the early ages. Historically, racism and equality have been central issues that have divided our country. Many actions from the past such as the decision in the Plessy versus Ferguson case, and present day actions like The Mississippi school system case have been the ongoing battle in today 's society. The struggle to achieve equality was made even more difficult by the legislation that is now considered racist in the Plessy versus Ferguson case.

John Adams, on the last day of his term, appointed forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices under the Organic Act, which was an attempt by the Federalists to take over the judicial branch before Thomas Jefferson took the office. The commissions were not delivered before the end of Adam’s term, so Thomas Jefferson claimed they were invalid and did not honor them. William Marbury was one of the appointed justices of the peace and appealed directly to the Supreme Court when he was denied his position. Due to the Judiciary Act of 1789, Marbury wanted the Supreme Court to make James Madison (Secretary of State) deliver the commissions.

The Marbury v. Madison court case was filed on February 11th, 1803 and settled on February 24th, 1803. The court case was ultimately decided by Marshall Court. Marbury v. Madison is arguably the most important Supreme Court case in US history. By introducing the principle of judicial review and the ability of the court to rule on the Constitutionality of laws, it has constrained Congress from enacting radical legislation that would have hurt the nature of our nation. Judicial review is the ability of a court to examine and determine if an act of Congress violates existing laws, State Constitutions, or the US Constitution.

The judicial branch, in its conception as outlined in Article III of the constitution was designated the “power to interpret the law, determine the constitutionality of the law, and apply it to individual cases (The White House)”. However, since the ratification of the constitution, much like the other two branches of government, the judicial branch has also experienced an expanded delegation of authority and power. This notion is evidenced in the 1803 decision on the case of Marbury v. Madison where the Supreme Court asserted its power of judicial review by ”blocking last-minute appointments by outgoing President John Adams (Chegg)” by declaring that these actions should not be permitted because the supreme court, under chief justice john Marshall declared them unconstitutional(Cornell). This set forth a very powerful precedent for judicial review, one that continues to play a critical role in political discourse today. Although the evolution of the judiciary commenced following the fallout of the 1803 decision, the courts have delegated to themselves a controversial role as policy-makers in response to societal demands and stresses placed upon the political system specifically during and after the civil rights movement that occurred in the United States during the 20th century. This expanded role into the realm of actual policy making is derived from the belief that the constitution is indeed a living and flexible document that must retain the capability for change. As the

5. No. The Supreme Court does not have original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus.