Legal Definitions - Marbury v. Madison (1803)

Marbury v. Madison (1803) is a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case that established the fundamental principle of judicial review. This pivotal decision solidified the Supreme Court's authority to examine laws passed by Congress and actions taken by the President to determine if they comply with the U.S. Constitution. If a law or action is found to violate the Constitution, the Court has the power to declare it unconstitutional, rendering it void.

Before this case, the exact scope of the Supreme Court's power to interpret the Constitution and invalidate acts of other government branches was not clearly defined. Marbury v. Madison firmly established the Court as the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution, ensuring that no branch of government can overstep its constitutional boundaries.

Here are some examples illustrating the impact of judicial review established by Marbury v. Madison:

• Review of a Federal Law: Imagine Congress passes a new federal law that makes it illegal for citizens to publish certain types of political commentary online, citing national security concerns. A group of journalists and civil liberties advocates challenges this law in court, arguing it violates the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. The case eventually reaches the Supreme Court. Applying the principle of judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison, the Court would carefully examine the new law and compare its provisions against the U.S. Constitution. If the Court determines that the law indeed infringes upon protected speech rights beyond what the Constitution allows, it would declare the law unconstitutional, thereby preventing its enforcement.

• Review of an Executive Action: Consider a scenario where the President issues an executive order that directs federal agencies to indefinitely detain individuals suspected of certain crimes without access to legal counsel, claiming it's necessary for public safety. Civil rights organizations and affected individuals file lawsuits, arguing that this executive order violates the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, which guarantee due process and the right to counsel. When this challenge reaches the Supreme Court, the justices would exercise judicial review, a power rooted in Marbury v. Madison. They would scrutinize the executive order to see if it aligns with constitutional requirements. If the Court finds the order to be an overreach of presidential power and a violation of fundamental constitutional rights, it would strike down the executive order, preventing the government from implementing that policy.