It is
emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the
law is…If two laws conflict with each other, the courts must decide on the
operation of each….This is of the very essence of judicial duty.
Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803
Chief Justice John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 1803
From
time to time, the Supreme Court has been the subject of one of my
articles. I love the Supreme Court and
am endlessly fascinated with the issues they discuss. Within the story of the Supreme Court, I’m
most intrigued with the career of John Marshall. He was the third chief justice of the Court
and widely considered the most important judicial figure in the history of the
United States. He is responsible for the
creation of the modern court and its powers.
However, like most things dealing with the law, one’s career is often
centered on a single case. For John
Marshall, that case was Marbury v.
Madison in 1803.
In
the waning days of the Adams administration, having been defeated by the
Democratic-Republican Thomas Jefferson, the Federalist president hurriedly
worked to fill a slew of vacant federal judicial positions. President Adams had been negligent to do so
earlier but worked overnight to complete them before leaving the White House
for good. He stacked his pile of “midnight
judges” appointees on his desk and assumed that the incoming president of a
different party would finish the process.
Upon entering the White House, President Jefferson and his Secretary of
State, James Madison, saw the appointees and pondered. Are they required to fulfill these Federalist
positions? They answered no and likely
threw them away.
One
of the judges in question, William Marbury, wanted his post – justice of the
peace of Washington, D.C. At the time,
the capital was a sleepy agricultural community with little for a justice of
the peace to worry about. He sued the
government and Secretary Madison for his job on the basis of the Judiciary Act
of 1789. In particular, he called for a
writ of mandamus – an order for the government to do its job. For Chief Justice Marshall, the strident
Federalist who wants and needs a stronger government for the good of the Court,
his sympathies are towards Marbury but he has a problem. With the little respect or prestige of the
Court, if he ruled in favor of Marbury and ordered the president to appoint
him, President Jefferson would simply ignore him. However, in reviewing the law, he sees a
chance to gain some much needed credibility for the Supreme Court.
As
John Marshall laid out his ruling, he began by saying that Marbury was
appropriately appointed and should be given his position. Nothing in the Constitution limits when a
president can make judicial appointments and therefore, the post should go to
Marbury. As the audience begins to think
that the Federalist judge has ruled in favor of the Federalist plaintiff,
Marshall shocks by attacking the Judiciary Act of 1789. In short, Marshall ruled that the portion of
the law used by the plaintiff was unconstitutional and therefore, Marbury’s
case and basis was invalid and his petition denied. Jefferson was now in a bind. If he did not accept Marshall’s opinion, he
would be compelled to give Marbury his position, with many other midnight
judges likely to follow the same path.
By accepting the Court’s opinion, he bestows upon the Court the ability
to review the actions of government and determine its constitutionality. In short, John Marshall took one step back to
take two steps forward at a later date.
It worked and the Court was given an important power over the other
branches – judicial review.
The
Supreme Court has the authority to review not only the actions of the
government but those of the lower courts, both federal and state. Over the course of his career, Marshall’s
decisions would establish a strong federal government in the areas of
interstate commerce, international contracts and on the question of federal law
superseding state law. Given the impact
that he had, it is surprising that he is not more well-known. Hopefully, I’ve changed that to some degree
with this little story. His life and his
work is worthy of attention and study.
No comments:
Post a Comment