answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803)

In the case of Marbury v. Madison, (1803), the Marshall Court declared a portion of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional.

The Judiciary Act of 1789, which extended to the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over issuing writs of mandamus (a court order requiring an official to take - or refrain from taking - an action within his or her scope of authority). The Court declared that portion of the Act, Section 13, unconstitutional because the Constitution did not specify issuing writs of mandamus as one of the Supreme Court's areas of original jurisdiction. According to Marshall, Congress had overreached its authority by attempting to make the Court responsible for all writs of mandamus.

Chief Justice Marshall determined that reviewing acts of the Legislative and Executive branches was within the Court's appellate jurisdiction, and that declaring laws unconstitutional and overturning legislation was within the scope of its authority.

As a result of this reasoning, the Court declared it did not have the authority to compel James Madison to deliver Marbury's commission, allowing him to take office as justice of the peace of the District of Columbia.

Some Constitutional scholars argue that Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution should be interpreted to include issuing writs of mandamus to government officials, based on this sentence:

"In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction."

The argument, in this case, is that James Madison should be considered a "public minister."

Marshall's decision may have been based as much in politics as in the letter of law. By declaring Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional, he avoided a direct confrontation with President Jefferson that might have weakened the power of the Judicial branch.

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar
More answers
User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Chief Justice John Marshall found Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional because Congress had assigned the Supreme Court original jurisdiction over writs of mandamus (a court order compelling someone to take an action for which he or she is legally responsible) for government officials, a power he stated was not authorized by Article III of the Constitution.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

Fourth Chief Justice John Marshall declared Section 13 (not the entire Act) of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional in the opinion of the US Supreme Court case Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803).

For more information, see Related Questions, below.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

9y ago

The Judiciary Act of 1789 gave the Supreme Court jurisdiction, but the Marshall court ruled the Act of 1789 to be an unconstitutional extension of judiciary power into the realm of the executive.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Chief Justice John Marshall declared Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional in his February 1803 opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case.

This answer is:
User Avatar

User Avatar

Wiki User

13y ago

Marbury vs. Madison

This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: When did Chief Justice John Marshall declare part of a judiciary act unconstitutional?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What did Chief Justice John Marshall declare unconstitutional?

Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789


What role did John Marshall play during the judicial acts?

He helped declare the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional.


What has been the evolution of the judicial branch's power?

The Supreme Court was considered the weakest branch of government until the time of Chief Justice Marshall. Marshall established that the court could declare acts unconstitutional, placing powers in the hands of the judiciary. Marbury versus Madison decided the issue and established the legal precedent.


What doctrine did Chief justice Marshall define?

Chief Justice John Marshall is credited with affirming the doctrine of judicial review by declaring Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional in Marbury v. Madison, 5 US 137 (1803).Although the Supreme Court under John Marshall was not the first to review a law for constitutionality, he was the first to declare an act of Congress unconstitutional.For more information, see Related Questions, below.


What is the term for the power the judiciary has to declare acts of the president or congress unconstitutional?

the answer is judicial reveiw!!


What is is the term for the power the judiciary has to declare acts of the president of congress unconstitutional?

the answer is judicial reveiw!!


What is judiciary review?

It is when the Supreme Court can overturn Laws Challenged by the Judiciary as Unconstitutional.


When john marshall was chief justice the supreme court interpretation of the constitution gave power to?

Supreme Court to declare acts of Congress and state laws unconstitutional


When John Marshall was Chief Justice the supreme courts interpretations of the constitution gave power to the?

Supreme Court to declare acts of Congress and state laws unconstitutional


Whose 1803 decision fortified the Supreme Court?

Fourth Chief Justice John Marshall. The question refers to Marshall's decision that the Judicial Branch, but specifically the US Supreme Court, had the right of judicial review in the case Marbury v. Madison, (1803). The Court used this power to declare Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional.


Does Congress have the expressed power to declare laws unconstitutional?

Congress cannot declare laws unconstitutional. The Judiciary Branch may declare a law unconstitutional only if it conflicts with some provision of the State or Federal Constitution. The Supreme Court can rule a law to be unconstitutional, but Congress, along with the States, can only amend the Constitution.


The principle established by chief justice marshall in a famous case that the supreme court can declare laws unconstitutional?

Judicial Review