MARBURY VS.

MADISON CASE DIGEST 5 US 137 (1803) Petitioners: William Marbury Respondent: James Madison, Secretary of the State Ponente: Justice Marshall FACTS: On the last day in office President John Adams names forty-two justices of the peace and sixteen new circuit court justices for the District of Columbia under the Organic Law, to take control of the federal judiciary before the Thomas Jefferson took office. The commission was signed by President Adams and sealed by acting Secretary of State, John Marshall but they were not delivered before the expiration of Adams term as President. When the new President Thomas Jefferson took office he refused to honor the commissions, claiming that they were invalid because they have not been delivered before the end of Adams term as president. William Marbury was one of the intended recipient of an appointment as justice of the peace. Marbury directly went to the supreme court to file his complaint, refusing for a writ of Mandamus to compel Jeffersons Secretary James Madison to deliver the commissions. At that time The Judiciary Act 1789had granted the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of Mandamus to any courts appointed or persons holding office, under the authority of the United States. ISSUES: 1. 2. 3. HELD: 1. Yes. Marbury has a right to the commission. His right originates in the Act of Congress passed on February 1801. Provided in the clauses of the Act passed three distinct operations, which was satisfied. a. Nomination- done by the President b. Appointment- done by the President with the consent of the Senate c. Commission- done by affixing the presidents signature along with the great seal done by the Secretary of State. Since the commission was signed and sealed was accomplish Marbury was appointed and giving him the legal right to hold the office for five years independent from the executive. That vested legal right must be protected by law. Yes. The law grants Marbury a remedy. The very essence of civil rights is to provide a remedy to an injured individual. That legal right of an individual is one of the first duties of to government that needs to be safeguarded Since the president signed that commission therefore his vested legal right must be given remedy by the law. No. The writ of Mandamus that will be issued by the US Supreme Court is not the remedy. The US Supreme Court was not given the appellate jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus. The strict and foremost duty of judiciary is to review the acts of congress and determine whether they are constitutional or not. If necessary they are also taked to expound and interpret the rule to particular cases. The act of issuing a writ of mandamus to an officer is not allowed since it is a matter of original jurisdiction. DISPOSITION: The writ of Mandamus application was denied. Marbury doesnt get the commission. Whether or not Marbury has a right to the commission. Whether or not the law grants a remedy to Marbury. Whether or not a mandamus that will be issued is the remedy.

2.

3.