Marbury V. Madison Case: The Judiciary Act Of 1789

Madison sticks to Jeffersonian ideals when he opposed the International Improvement Bill of 1817, because the power to regulate commerce is not specifically given to the federal government in the Constitution. In the message he wrote to Congress, He illustrates that this authority belongs to the states, which is an act of strict interpretation of the constitution. It also indicated the problem of sovereignty between states and the federal government. In fact, this action directly opposed that of the previous president Thomas Jefferson in regards to the Embargo Acts. Jefferson uses loose interpretation to say that the federal government does have the power to regulate commerce, while Madison complies with his party's beliefs of strict constructionism.

The U.S Supreme Court reversed the state court decision on Dartmouth College V. Woodward case in 1819 regarding a violation of the contract clause. The college trustees claimed the state of New Hampshire passed legislative acts which favored Republicans giving them control over the college, ultimately turning Dartmouth College into a public institution. The college trustees argued this was a violation of the original contract created by King George III the founder of Dartmouth College. According to Mason and Stephenson, Jr (2012), “The U. S Supreme Court questioned; (1) Is this contract protected by the constitution of the United States? (2) Is it impaired by the acts under which the defendants hold?” pp.321.

New York and Virginia, two major states with a massive impact, were hesitant to ratify. These states were filled with Anti-Federalist, who feared strong central government, as well as the president becoming dictator or king. In order to persuade the Anti-Federalists, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay created the Federalists Papers. Then finally, enough states had ratified for the Constitution to go in effect, although Virginia, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island had not yet ratified. The Anti-Federalists felt that the Constitution needed a Bill of Rights to protect personal freedoms.

[Doc. 7 ] This lead to the ratification of 15th Amendment. The 15th Amendment protects the right to vote of the emancipated slaves as it says on the document, “the right to vote shall not be denied on the basis of race, color, or previous condition.” The aftermath of civil war, resulted with good economical changes.

Dred Scott was taken back into slavery and accused Sandford because Scott was in a free states and claimed that he was in the free state long enough to be a free slave. The Supreme court ruled against Dred Scott, this decision affected blacks preventing them to become citizens and an giving them the right to appeal to a jury and making it harder for a slave to escape because the free states didn’t make a runaway slave a free slave. The case also affected popular sovereignty. Where states got to choose if they were to be a free states or a slave

BRIEF MARBURY v. MADISON Supreme Court of the United States, 1803 5 U.S. 137 FACTS: President John Adams appointed William Marbury as a justice of the peace in the District of Columbia towards the end of his term under the Organic Act. With an attempt to take control of the federal judiciary, the documents were signed and sealed; however, the documents weren’t delivered before President John Adams’ term ended. Subsequently, Secretary of State, James Madison, was to deliver the commission; however, newly elected, President Thomas Jefferson, refused to recognize the appointment. President Thomas Jefferson claimed the commission was invalid and advised James Madison to disregard.

The Fifteenth Amendment granted African-American males the right to vote in the late 1800s. However, through the use of poll taxes, literacy tests and other means, southern states were able to effectively discourage African-Americans. It was not till 1965, almost a century later, that the Voting Rights Act was passed by Congress and signed by President Lyndon Baines Johnson; enforcing the Fifteenth Amendment. But acquiring the Voting Rights Act of 1965 was an enduring task for African-American citizens and supporters. A perfect example is “Bloody Sunday”, where a group of activist, in their attempt to march from Selma to Montgomery, Alabama protesting for the rights of voters, were beaten and left for dead of the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama.

Some members of the congress like, David Wilmot, believed that slaves should not be allowed on the new territory that was won from the Mexican War. This belief made Wilmot plan the “Wilmot Provision”, which said that slavery was not allowed in any of the land annexed from Mexico and the Mexican War (Doc. H). This historical context on this

Debates over reparations has continued since the Civil War that ended in 1865. The Reparation Coordinating Committee, led by Randall Robinson, plans to bring huge lawsuit against the government and the major corporations that benefitted from the use of African slaves. Others disagree with Robinson’s claims. Walter Williams, an economic professor at Georgia Mason University, is against opponents of reparations. Williams argues that African slaves benefitted from the legacy of slavery.

Andrew Jackson’s policy of Indian Removal was not justified because the Indians had rights to own the lands and the U.S. did not follow their democratic ways towards the natives. One example from the text is, “the state of Georgia, in her attempt to extend her laws over us…in direction opposition to the treaties” (The Cherokees Appeal to Congress). Based on this information, I realized the U.S. government was disobeying the “supreme law of the land” or treaties, as of John Marshall (Chief Justice of Supreme Court) had stated and was no different on how Britain had unfairly treated the Americans before. Also, the text supports this idea by stating “This is the land of our nativity, and the land of our...birth. We cannot consent to abandon

The Quasi War was an undeclared war between the United States and France from 1798 to 1800. Tensions between the U.S. and France began when the U.S. signed the Jay Treaty with Great Britain and refused to give the French Republic financial aid after the French Revolution. President Adams attempted to ease these tensions by sending American officials to negotiate an agreement with France. When the officials arrived, they were met by three French agents who demanded a bribe. This was known as the XYZ Affair.

Mississippi v. Johnson 71 U.S. (4 Wall) 475 (1867) Facts A case involving After the civil war, Congress passed the Reconstructions Acts of 1867. President Johnson vetoes the legislation, but congress overrode his veto and the acts became federal law. In response, Mississippi sued President Johnson asking for an injunction to prohibit him from enforcing the laws. Mississippi argued that the president should not be and is not above the law.

Under the Judiciary Act of 1801, Marbury sued Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789. He was asking the Court to force Madison to accept the appointment. The court denied and held that it lacked strength because the section of the Judiciary Act passed by Congress in 1789 authorized the Court to issue such a writ was invalid. Chief Justice John Marshall declared that the Constitution must always

Dred Scott, slave of army surgeon John Emerson, had travelled with Emerson from Missouri to several states including Minnesota. The Missouri Compromise declared Minnesota a free state. After returning to Missouri, Scot sued for his freedom based on the grounds that he had previously lived in a free state. When the case reached the supreme court, the court ruled that living in a free state for a period of time did not make Scott a free man, that the Missouri compromise was unconstitutional because Congress did not have the right to prohibit slavery in any territory as that violated the 5th amendment, and finally that as a black man, Scott was excluded from citizenship and could not bring suit Abraham Lincoln was Republican candidate in the

The Judiciary Act of 1801, a law that created more federal judge positions, contributed to the establishment of judicial review by becoming the first law to be overturned by the process of judicial review and because it caused Chief Justice John Marshall to lay down three principles for judicial review. To begin, the Judiciary Act of 1801 was created shortly before President John Adams left office as an attempt of the Federalist party in order to help keep as many Federalists as possible in government. Adams did this knowing that he or any of his fellow Federalists would not be elected as president. This law evoked the case Marbury vs. Madison, a case between a man who had been promised a job created by the Judiciary Act of 1801 and the secretary