Constitutional Law

Marbury v. Madison

Main question: how much power does the court have to enforce things about the government

Does Marbury have a legal right: yes. sealed document and just needs to be delivered to be carried out

Is there remedy: yes, delivering

Does the Supreme Court have jurisdiction: No

Article III, Section I established the judicial power in one Supreme Court and allows Congress to ordain and establish inferior courts. Here, the relevant court is the Supreme Court, which has been established as required by the constitution. Article III, Section II clause 1 explains the jurisdiction of federal courts, which is not relevant here because we are dealing with a question of jurisdiction for the Supreme Court.

Article III, Section II, Clause 2 does discuss the relevant jurisdictional features of the Supreme Court. This section establishes that the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction grants a court the right to say what the law is on a case that first begins in that court. According to Article III, Section II, Clause 2, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction over the cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and Consuls, and cases where a state is one of the parties. This clause also outlines the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Appellate jurisdiction is the jurisdiction a court has to evaluate an appeal of the decision of a lower court. This clause says the Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction over all other cases that they do not have original jurisdiction over with exceptions as created by Congress.

Marbury argued that Congress had made an exception to the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction through Section 13. However, John Marshall rejected this argument. He determined that original jurisdiction were clearly enumerated powers within the Constitution, showing that they were intentionally limited to the exclusive list to not have an oppressive federal government that overrides state rights protected by the 9th and 10th amendments. If Congress could give original jurisdiction, then it would not have been necessary for the framers to enumerate them. On the other hand, appellate jurisdiction was not specifically limited, so Marshall determined that the exceptions part of this clause did apply to the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (and only the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court). Therefore, Section 13 (establishing additional original jurisdiction for the Supreme Court) was unconstitutional. Marshall used the court’s power of judicial review here to declare the legislative branch’s action as unconstitutional, while still also noting the potential future ability for the court to declare the executive branch’s actions unconstitutional (for depriving Marbury of his vested right) under a future case with proper jurisdiction. With this, Marbury used the power of judicial review and expressed it as a check the Supreme Court had over the other two branches. At the same time, the Court also constrained itself by not declaring the actions of the executive branch as unconstitutional because it would have been exceeding its powers in doing so and violating the Constitution itself.

Ex Parte McCardle

William McCardle was arrested by the military under the Reconstruction acts, which granted the military the power to act as police during Reconstruction efforts in the south after the Confederacy fell. McCardle was arrested for publishing inflammatory articles claiming that the Union was violating the Constitution through Reconstruction.

After his arrest, McCardle sought a writ of habeas corpus from a lower federal court, which compelled the military to bring him before a judge for his release for his purported unlawful detainment. This court had jurisdiction under the Constitution. Article III, Section 1 establishes Congress’s ability to create inferior federal courts, which it did in this case with this lower level court. Article III Section II explains these courts can have jurisdiction over cases and controversies dealing with federal questions or certain diversity requirements. Since Congress has the ability to create federal courts, they also have the ability to establish jurisdiction for these federal courts, so long as it does not exceed the jurisdictions allowed under the constitution.

McCardle lost his case and brought it to the Supreme Court under appeal. Article III Section I of the Constitution establishes the Supreme Court, granting it the judiciary power. Article III, Section II, Clause II explains the original and appellate jurisdictions of this case. Original jurisdiction is not relevant here because it is the court’s ability to hear a case for the first time and dictate law in that case, but an inferior court has already ruled on this case previously. Therefore, appellate jurisdiction, the ability to hear and review a case that has already been decided, applies here because the inferior lower court had ruled on it. Article III, Section II, Clause II allows for complete appellate jurisdiction with the only potential limitations being drawn by Congress. Therefore, ordinarlily, the Court would have had jurisdiction over McCardle’s writ of habeas corpus. However, here, Congress repealed the law they had previously passed granting the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over cases involving writs of habeas corpus. The Supreme Court here found that Congress’s actions were Constitutional and that they did not have the power to hear McCardle’s case on appeal.

m

m