Notes on Marbury v. Madison and the Judiciary Act of 1801

Historical Context

• The presidential election of 1800 was highly contentious.

• Federalist President John Adams sought reelection against the opposition of Democratic-Republicans, led by Thomas Jefferson.

• The political struggle highlighted growing divisions between Federalists and Anti-Federalists.

Legislation and Actions Leading to the Case

• In a bid to maintain influence, the Federalist-led Congress passed the Judiciary Act of 1801, also referred to as the Midnight Judges Act.

  • This act reorganized the federal judiciary and created numerous judgeships.

  • Fostered the appointment of last-minute judges by President Adams, notably referred to as Midnight Judges.

• Adams aimed to appoint Federalists to these positions during his final days in office.

  • The commissions for these appointments were set to be finalized on March 3rd, involving the Secretary of State's role.

Key Individuals Involved

• John Marshall: Served as Adams’s Secretary of State and later became the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

  • He was responsible for signing and sealing the commissions but could not deliver them before Jefferson took office.

• James Madison: The new Secretary of State under Jefferson, instructed to withhold commission deliveries.

• William Marbury: Appointed as Justice of the Peace for the District of Columbia, whose commission remained undelivered.

Legal Proceedings: Marbury v. Madison

• Marbury filed a suit against Madison in the Supreme Court, seeking a writ of mandamus to compel the delivery of his commission.

• The case was significant due to its exploration of original jurisdiction authority.

Court's Findings

1. Lawful Appointment: Chief Justice Marshall concluded that Marbury was lawfully appointed and thus had a right to his commission.

2. Judicial Review: The Court ruled against issuing the writ, declaring that the relevant section of the Judiciary Act of 1789 was unconstitutional.

   • This highlighted the conflict between the Act and Article III of the U.S. Constitution, which delineates the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.

   • Established the precedent of judicial review, empowering the Court to determine the constitutionality of legislative acts.

Significance of the Case

• The ruling from Marbury v. Madison marked a watershed moment in the establishment of the Supreme Court's authority in the U.S. legal system, inscribing the principle of judicial review firmly into American jurisprudence.

• The phrase, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is," from Marshall's opinion remains emblazoned in the Supreme Court building, reiterating the Court's critical role in law interpretation.

Legacy

• The case remains foundational in understanding the power dynamics between the branches of government, encapsulating the tension between legislative authority and judicial oversight.

• Highlights the importance of the judiciary in ensuring that laws adhere to the Constitution.

Notes on Supreme Court Case Acceptance and Procedure

• Appeals to the Supreme Court

  • Old TV shows portray the process as easy (e.g., cases like a speeding ticket).

  • However, it's not a right to have a case heard; it's at the discretion of the justices.

• Acceptance Rate

  • Approximately 8,000 cases submitted annually.

  • Only 80 cases are accepted, resulting in a 1% acceptance rate.

• Court System Structure

  • Three layers in the federal court system:

  • District court (lowest level).

  • Circuit court (appeal level).

    • The U.S. has eleven circuits plus a twelfth for D.C. and a federal circuit for patents and military cases.

  • Supreme Court (highest court).

• Petition for Writ of Certiorari

  • Nearly all cases require this petition to ask the Supreme Court to review a case.

  • It focuses on important questions about federal law rather than settling facts.

  • Aim: Ensure uniform application of federal law across the U.S. (Constitution and Congressional laws).

  • Granting happens if "the rule of four" applies (four justices agree to hear the case).

• Implications of Denying Cert

  • Not hearing a case doesn't imply agreement or a ruling on lower court decisions.

  • It simply indicates a decision that the case won't set law for the country.

• Categories of Cases Accepted

  1. National Importance

  • Example: Bush v. Gore determined the outcome of the 2000 presidential election.

  1. Invalidation of Federal Law

  • Example: Gonzalez v. Raich involved federal drug law conflicting with California's medical marijuana law.

  • Supreme Court ruled federal law applies, allowing prosecution under federal law even if state law permits.

  1. Resolving Split Decisions in Lower Courts

  • Example: Obergefell v. Hodges resolved a split where the Sixth Circuit banned same-sex marriage, conflicting with other circuits that upheld it.

  • The ruling legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, clarifying federal law application.

• Framework for Understanding Case Selection

  • The three categories provide a useful framework, but are not strict rules.

  • Decisions ultimately depend on the discretion of the Supreme Court justices.

Judicial Review Notes

Judicial Review

• Definition: Judicial review refers to the process by which courts review laws and actions made by the legislative and executive branches to ensure they align with the Constitution.

Chapter 1: Supreme Court

• Role of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court is the highest court in the United States and is primarily responsible for interpreting the Constitution.

  • The court often deals with cases that arise from new laws.

  • When a new law is enacted, the Supreme Court may decide to review it.

  • In this review process, the Court examines whether the law adheres to the principles outlined in the Constitution.

• Review Process:

  • Justices read the new law thoroughly.

  • They compare its provisions to the outline of the Constitution.

  • If the law aligns with constitutional guidelines, it is upheld and remains in effect.

  • Conversely, if the law contradicts or fails to comply with the Constitution, it is deemed "unconstitutional" and can be rejected or struck down by the Court.

Chapter 2: Unconstitutional Law

• Definition of Unconstitutional Law:

  • An unconstitutional law is any law that does not conform to the constitutional rules.

  • Such laws should not have been permitted in the first place.

• Court's Authority:

  • The Supreme Court and other courts hold the authority to declare a law unconstitutional.

  • This power acts as a check on legislative and executive actions, ensuring that laws and policies respect constitutional principles and fundamental rights.

Memorization Tip

• Remember the connection between "judicial" and "judge":

  • The first three letters of “judicial” – "Jud" – resemble the word "judge". This helps to retain the concept that judicial review is fundamentally about the judges in the courts reviewing laws and their constitutionality.

ACUTAL LECTURE

• 11th Amendment - an individual cannot sue a state in another states court

• 18th Amendment - prohibition of alcohol; known as the great experiment, which is the ban of alcohol in 1919 and led to the roaring 1920s

  • Scofflaw - people made their own alcohol since they couldn’t buy it

  • The Great Depression leads to the end of the roaring 20s

• 21st Amendment - gets rid of another amendment; empowers the states to regulate their own alcohol laws (T. Roosevelt)

  • the repeal comes with this amendment which was in 1933

• 3 district courts (trial level is a district court)

• an appeal on a federal level would lead to a “circuit court” (appeals)

• the supreme court is the last court of appeal

• # of supreme court justices allowed to hear a case is 4; known as the rule of four

• there are a total of 9 justices on the supreme court

• the judiciary act of 1789 spells out how the courts make out will exist and something else i did not catch because he talks to fucking fast

• — cases that adjourned diplomats

• mootness - ???

• 13 circuit courts - 11 are regional and 2 are in DC

• 1% — can only end up in a federal court when you break a federal law

CASES TO KNOW

• Marbury v Madison

• Brown v Mississippi - 1936

concurrent jurisdiction — file a case in federal court

monday - quiz on bureacreacy