John Adams Supreme Court Case Analysis

Words: 625
Pages: 3

In the presidential election of 1800 Thomas Jefferson Defeated John Adams. Before he left office, Adams and congress passed the Judiciary act of 1801 which added judges, created more courts and gave the president more control over the appointment of judges. Adams used this act to frustrate his republican predecessor by appointing federalists in order to preserve his party’s control of the judiciary. William Marbury was appointed Justice of the Peace in the District of Columbia. Although he had been approved by the senate, his commission was not sent before Adams left office which meant that he could not begin working until his commission was approved. However, when Jefferson came into office, he ordered his Secretary of State, to withhold the …show more content…
Madison does not involve any major constitutional issues, they were bought about when John Marshall recognized that he had a perfect case to expound on the basic principle of judicial review. John Marshall declared that the court had no right to issue a writ of mandamus because the relevant provision of the act was unconstitutional. He argued that section 13 of the Judiciary act was inconsistent with article three section two of the constitution “the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction” in “all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party,” and that “in all the other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction.” Overall, the court found That Madison’s refusal to deliver the commision was illegal. However, Marshall did not order Madison to turn in Marbury’s commission though writ of mandamus. Marshall ruled that it was unconstitutional for Marbury to request a writ of mandamus from the court because of article three section two of the constitution. As a result Jefferson technically won the case but the court won in the long run by receiving the power of judicial