Marbury Vs Madison Case Brief Essay

Words: 559
Pages: 3

Marbury v. Madison on the other hand was an Anti-federalist favored court ruling. In this case horizontal judicial review was established (Yoesle). President Adams appointed many Federalists, moments before his term ending, but Madison following Thomas Jefferson’s orders didn’t deliver the commissions. William Marbury, using a provision of the Judiciary Act of 1789 that allowed the court to hears cases about original jurisdiction asked to be seated. Due to the pertinent part of the judiciary conflicting with the Constitution, the court refused Marbury’s request (Gillman et al. 111). Chief Justice Marshall ruled and the decision established the checks and balances of federal law constitutionality (Yoesle). This is an Anti-Federalist ruling, because their fear that the federal courts would have too much power was counteracted by the court itself! …show more content…
The courts enforced and respected the separate powers each branch held. For the Anti-Federalist it was a sign that their distress of one branch becoming too powerful and the central government becoming overall controlling wasn’t going to occur before jumping the hurdle of checks and balances. Furthermore, Martin V. Hunter Lessee was the case that established vertical judicial review. In contrast to Marbury v. Madison, this case was a federalist ruling which upheld that the United States Supreme Court has the authority to review verdicts made by the state supreme courts when a federal dispute is involved (Yoesle). The establishment of supremacy of federal over state courts was in fulfillment with the Federalist philosophies to assure that strong elites were in charge of national affairs seeing they didn’t have faith in ordinary