Question 1

Marbury v. Madison is a legal case decided by the United States Supreme Court that declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, establishing the doctrine of judicial review, which means that American courts have the authority to overturn laws and statutes that violate the Constitution (Corwin, 2017).The court’s opinion was passed and written by Chief Justice John Marshall and is considered to be the foundation of U.S. constitutional law. The case involved William Marbury, who had been appointed Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia whose commission had not been delivered. He petitioned the Supreme Court to compel the new Secretary of State, James Madison, joined by the other three appointees, to deliver the commissions. The court found that Madison's refusal to hand over the commission was illegal and held that the provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was itself unconstitutional because it extended the original jurisdiction beyond that which Article III, Section 2 established.

Question 2

Justice Marshall's rationale for reaching his final ruling in the case was that a writ of mandamus was the proper way to seek a remedy, but he concluded that the court could not issue it. He reasoned that the Judiciary Act of 1789 greatly conflicted with the constitution. He noted that Congress did not have the power to alter or modify the constitution by regular legislation due to the fact that the Constitution is placed before the laws by the Supreme Clause. He found out that Marbury’s and other appointees’ rights had been violated by Jefferson when he blocked their commission. He based his ruling on Article III, Section 2 of the constitution that specified that the court had jurisdiction in limited types of cases that involved ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls, as well as those in which a state should be party (Nelson, 2018). He wrote that the powers of the legislature are defined and limited, and that they shall not be subject to error or omission. Marshall framed his decision by answering three major questions: whether Marbuy had the right to the commission, whether a writ of mandamus was the proper remedy, and whether the Supreme Court had the right to issue such a mandamus. In answering the questions, he framed the Jefferson administration as not obeying the law because he established that Marbury had the right to the commission.

Question 3

The Marbury v. Madison ruling established the power of the federal courts over other branches of the government to interpret laws, making the federal courts' authority undisputed today. The power of the court was to establish that the power of the court was the ultimate arbiter of the constitution, which was aimed at chastising the Jefferson administration for its failure to obey and respect the law. He made an authority that ensured the court’s decision would not be challenged by the administration. The idea that the Supreme Court could actually overturn a congressional act, which dominated the case, made it a landmark decision in history. The ruling in the case established that the federal laws that conflict with the U.S. constitution are invalid and that judges have the power to determine whether federal laws are unconstitutional or not, in what is known as a judicial review (PUB & Douai, 2017). Before this case, it was unclear which branch of government had the final say on what was unconstitutional. There was an issue of whether a federal law could be enforced if it was seen to violate the constitution. The case resolved the issue and increased the power of the Supreme Court in the process.

Question 4

The Marbury v. Madison ruling helped to strengthen the federal judiciary through the power of judicial review, thereby radically altering the function of the supreme courts. It was an example of judicial activism. It added to their cup that the judicial branch of the government had the power to interpret laws. The decision in Marbury v. Madison is in keeping with the intent of the constitution for the role of the judiciary. The ruling played a key role in making the Supreme Court a separate branch of government. When Chief Justice Marshall enforced his decisions, the court took its position as the equal branch of the government, which has rightfully given it legitimacy in discharging its duties. The decision of the ruling greatly expanded the power of the Supreme Court by giving it the right to overturn acts of Congress, a power that is not granted by the Constitution. Marshall declared that the constitution must always take precedence in any conflict between it and the law giving the courts power to declare acts of Congress unconstitutional..

Question 1

Marbury v. Madison is a legal case decided by the United States Supreme Court that declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, establishing the doctrine of judicial review, which means that American courts have the authority to overturn laws and statutes that violate the Constitution (Corwin, 2017).

Question 2

Justice Marshall's rationale for reaching his final ruling in the case was that a writ of mandamus was the proper way to seek a remedy, but he concluded that the court could not issue it.

Question 3

The Marbury v. Madison ruling established the power of the federal courts over other branches of the government to interpret laws, making the federal courts' authority undisputed today.

Question 4

The Marbury v. Madison ruling helped to strengthen the federal judiciary through the power of judicial review, thereby radically altering the function of the supreme courts.