Marbury v. Madison
Established judicial review in American constitutional law.
Marbury v. Madison (1803) is a landmark Supreme Court decision that established the principle of judicial review, empowering American courts to invalidate laws that violate the U.S. Constitution. The case arose from the political rivalry between outgoing President John Adams, a Federalist, and incoming President Thomas Jefferson, a Democratic-Republican. After losing the 1800 election, Adams and the Federalist-controlled Congress created new judicial positions, and Adams nominated nearly 60 Federalist supporters to fill them just two days before his term ended. The Senate quickly confirmed these nominees, and Secretary of State John Marshall—who had also been appointed Chief Justice—signed and sealed their commissions. However, with only one day left before Jefferson’s inauguration, Marshall’s brother was unable to deliver a few of the commissions, including one for William Marbury, a Maryland businessman and ardent Federalist. Jefferson took office and instructed his Secretary of State, James Madison, to withhold the undelivered commissions, believing them void. After months of refusal, Marbury sued Madison directly in the Supreme Court in late 1801, seeking a writ of mandamus to force delivery of his commission. Chief Justice Marshall, writing for the Court, ruled that Madison’s refusal was illegal and that a court would normally order such a delivery. However, the Court also examined Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which Marbury had relied upon to bring his case. The Court found that this law expanded the Supreme Court’s original jurisdiction beyond what the Constitution allowed. Striking down Section 13 as unconstitutional, the Court held that it could not issue the writ, establishing that the judiciary has the power to nullify laws conflicting with the Constitution. This decision defined the boundary between the executive and judicial branches and affirmed the Constitution as binding law, not mere political ideals.
- Case name
- Marbury v. Madison
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Chief Justice
- John Marshall
- Key principle
- Judicial review
- Outcome
- Unanimous 4–0 decision against Marbury
Lore & Background
Marbury v. Madison arose from the political rivalry between outgoing President John Adams and incoming President Thomas Jefferson after the election of 1800. Adams, a Federalist, appointed several dozen Federalist supporters to new circuit judge and justice of the peace positions just two days before his term ended. The Senate quickly confirmed these appointments, but outgoing Secretary of State John Marshall was unable to deliver all the commissions before Jefferson’s inauguration. Jefferson believed the undelivered commissions were void and instructed his secretary of state, James Madison, not to deliver them. One undelivered commission belonged to William Marbury, a Maryland businessman and strong Federalist supporter. After repeated refusals, Marbury sued in the Supreme Court, seeking a writ of mandamus to force Madison to deliver the commission. Chief Justice John Marshall, writing for the Court, held that Madison’s refusal was illegal and that a court would normally order delivery. However, the Court found that Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789, which Marbury relied on, expanded the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction beyond what the Constitution allowed. The Court struck down that section, establishing the principle of judicial review: American courts have the power to invalidate laws that violate the Constitution. Because the law was invalid, the Court lacked jurisdiction and could not issue the writ. This decision defined the boundary between the executive and judicial branches and established the Constitution as enforceable law, not merely political ideals.
Reader's Guide
The Supreme Court's opinion, written by Chief Justice John Marshall, held that Madison's refusal to deliver Marbury's commission was illegal and that normally a court could order the government official to deliver it. However, the court did not order Madison to comply. The court struck down that section, announcing that American courts have the power to invalidate laws that violate the Constitution—a power now known as judicial review. Because striking down the law removed any jurisdiction the court might have had, it could not issue the writ Marbury requested. This decision established that the U.S. Constitution is actual law, not merely a statement of political principles, and helped define the boundary between the executive and judicial branches.
Did You Know?
- The case originated from the rivalry between outgoing president John Adams and incoming president Thomas Jefferson.
- William Marbury was a Maryland businessman and a strong supporter of Adams and the Federalist Party.
- The Supreme Court's decision was unanimous, 4–0, and written by Chief Justice John Marshall.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are Marbury v. Madison's powers or role?
The decision established the principle of judicial review, meaning the federal courts can strike down legislation that conflicts with the Constitution. In doing so, it drew a clear line between the executive and judicial branches and gave the Court a permanent check on the other two.
Why is Marbury v. Madison important?
It is widely regarded as the single most consequential ruling in American constitutional law because it permanently anchored the judiciary as the final arbiter of what the Constitution means. Without it, the Supreme Court would lack the structural authority to invalidate acts of Congress or the President.
More in Constitutional Law 1-24
Spotted an error? Know more?
This is a living reference — every entry is fact-audited, and reader corrections feed straight into our audit queue. Suggest an edit · See this site's audit record