Inkspire

Introduction

In the United States of America, the Constitution is regarded as the will of the people. Way back in elementary school, children are taught how there are three branches of government that balance each other and make sure that the American government functions in perfect harmony, but it wasn’t always like that. For instance, the judicial branch (including the Supreme Court) used to have almost no power. One case changed all of that; it gave the Supreme Court and the entire judicial branch a place in the government and equal power over the system. Circling back to how the Constitution represents the will of the people of America, the Supreme Court today has power to make sure that what the people want (as described in the Constitution) will always win over the will of the legislature – which are laws. Now you might be wondering what does that mean? Do people actually have more power than the policies passed by the legislative branch? According to what was outlined in what might be the most foundationally significant case in the entire history of the United States Supreme Court, yes, the government’s policies are supposed to directly correlate with what people want, but it’s up to the people to decide how far that doctrine is actually being maintained.

Context

The people were not happy with John Adams at the end of his four year term. He somehow managed to single-handedly restrict freedoms of speech and press, increase government spending on the military significantly (which made him look power-hungry), and get into a quasi-war with France (which completely disregarded Washington’s desire for America to remain neutral in foreign policy matters) all in less than four years. The dissatisfaction from all of the events listed previously led to John Adams’ political enemy – Thomas Jefferson – getting elected over him. At the time, there were two political parties: the Federalists (who believed in a strong central government) and the Democratic-Republicans (who opted for less government intervention). John Adams – being a staunch Federalist – did not wish to see his beloved country fall into the hands of Democratic-Republicans – like Thomas Jefferson. To prevent that from happening, in the very last few weeks of his presidency, Adams appointed several Federalist judges (58 total) to courts all over the nation. The last period of a president’s term is called the Midnight, so the judges Adams appointed in a rush were aptly named the Midnight Judges. The only issue was that Adams could say he wanted certain people to have certain positions, but in the rush of leaving office it’s easy to forget certain people.

The Case

In the time when the Supreme Court had little to no power, Adams appointed John Marshall as both his Secretary of State and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Today, no single person would be allowed to hold that much power in both the executive and judicial branches at once (they would be more powerful than the president if they did). It was initially John Marshall’s job to make sure that all of the Midnight Judges were appointed. Unfortunately, in the rush to get all matters settled before John Adams left the office, John Marshall left four judges unappointed; one of those judges was William Marbury who would reappear to cause major changes in the government. The four forgotten Midnight Judges were left on the next president’s table as their first matter of business. Thomas Jefferson, however, told his own Secretary of State – James Madison – to get rid of the documents and pretend they never existed. Marbury – a forgotten Midnight Judge – was confused as to why he had not yet received his appointment letter and was enraged when he realized what had happened. Instead of taking his case to the Circuit Court of the District of Columbia where he was more likely to actually win the case, Marbury went straight to the Supreme Court and sued James Madison. John Marshall, who was presiding over the case, had a difficult decision to make. If he sided with Marbury who had a good case, there was no guarantee that Jefferson would actually listen to the court’s decision – which would weaken the Supreme Court’s credibility. If Marshall favored the president, it would make the Supreme Court seem cowardly and submissive to the executive branch. In the end, Marshall decided that Marbury was entitled to his commission, but the law that allowed William Marbury to sue James Madison (Judiciary Act of 1789) was unconstitutional.

Effects

Marbury v. Madison was the very first time the Supreme Court declared a piece of legislation “unconstitutional”. From that moment onwards, if the judicial branch thought a policy violated the will represented in the American Constitution, they had the power to get rid of it. This power is called judicial review. Judicial review transformed the judicial branch; they were no longer a group that heard cases in the basement of the US Capitol Building, they had actual power in government matters. Although the idea that the Supreme Court should be able to review laws passed by the legislative branch was written previously by Alexander Hamilton in the Federalist Papers, this case was the first time it was put to the test and firmly defined.

Conclusion

Legislation is meant to represent the will of the people, and the Supreme Court is meant to ensure that that is what occurs. In a world without judicial review, immigrants would be discriminated against based on their race, religion, and gender, and it would be a monumental feat just to travel between the states. Luckily, the Supreme Court had the power to step in and declare that any laws based on prejudices and discrimination should be considered unconstitutional. The government generally functions in harmony to aid the people; however, it is nowhere near perfect yet. Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that everyone has their voices heard, because everyone has a story to tell.