Marbury v. Madison: The Enduring Legacy of Judicial Review.

On July 14th, 2025, as I walked down the aisle of the Supreme Court building, I felt a familiar flutter of unease perhaps akin to the daunting scrutiny of a Socratic lecture, a fear almost all law students can recall. As students of law, we constantly hear about the grand, historic decisions taken by this very court, and how they shaped our American legal system. I couldn't help but wonder if Justice Marshall, on that pivotal day, truly envisioned that his decision would not only define America but also serve as a source of inspiration for other countries and governments to follow.

For many who haven't spent hours trying to understand it for their law lectures, or for those less familiar with the workings of jurisprudence, "Marbury v. Madison" might sound like a dusty old legal case. Yet, it remains one of the most foundational decisions in U.S. history. Decided in 1803, this single ruling established a principle so powerful it transformed the entire landscape of American law: Judicial Review.

The Backstory: A Political Firestorm

To understand Marbury, you must go back to the heated political climate of the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Many would argue that by 2025, little has changed in America, given the similarly heated political climate.

During that time, the Federalist Party, led by President John Adams, was losing power to Thomas Jefferson's Democratic-Republicans. In a last-ditch effort to maintain influence, Adams appointed a slew of Federalist judges and justices of the peace in the final days of his presidency. These judges were also called the "Midnight Judges."

One of these midnight appointees was William Marbury, who was appointed as a justice of the peace for the District of Columbia. However, his commission wasn't delivered before Jefferson took office.

When President Jefferson came to the power he instructed his Secretary of State, James Madison, to withhold these undelivered commissions. Marbury, understandably upset, sued Madison, asking the Supreme Court to issue a writ of mandamus (which is a legal order compelling a government official to perform an act).

Chief Justice John Marshall's Masterstroke

This case landed on the desk of Justice John Marshall. He was President’ Adams's former Secretary of State and he was also a Federalist[1]. This put him in a tricky position. If the Court ordered Madison to deliver the commission, it is possible that Jefferson’s administration would likely ignore it, making the Supreme Court appear weak and ineffective. If the Court sided with Madison, it would look like it was caving political pressure.

However, Marshall found a way to navigate this dilemma. He broke the decision into three key questions:

Did William Marbury have the right to the commission? Marshall affirmed this, noting that the appointment was made, and the commission was signed and sealed; delivery was merely a formality.

If Marbury had a right, and that right was violated, did the law provide him with a remedy? Again, Marshall affirmed this, stating that for every legal right, there must be a legal remedy.

If there was a remedy, could the Supreme Court issue it (i.e., issue a writ of mandamus)? This proved to be the pivotal question.

Marshall examined the Judiciary Act of 1789, the law that had established the federal court system. He found that this act granted the Supreme Court the power to issue writs of mandamus in cases like Marbury's. However, Marshall then turned his attention to the U.S. Constitution.

The Birth of Judicial Review

Marshall ruled that the Judiciary Act of 1789 violated Article III of the Constitution because it gave the Supreme Court original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus in these kinds of cases.

The Supreme Court's original jurisdiction of the cases it hears first and appellate jurisdiction the cases it hears on appeal are delineated in Article III. Marshall maintained that Congress could not enlarge the Court's original jurisdiction through legislation because it was expressly stated in the Constitution.

This led to Marshall's monumental conclusion: When an act of Congress conflicts with the Constitution, it is the duty of the judicial branch to declare that act unconstitutional.

In his famous words, "It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is."

Therefore, while Marbury did have a right to his commission, the Supreme Court could not issue the writ of mandamus because the part of the Judiciary Act that allowed it was unconstitutional. Marbury lost his job, but the Supreme Court gained immense power.

Why It Matters Today

Marbury v. Madison is significant for several reasons:

Judicial Review: This is arguably the case's most important result. It granted the Supreme Court (and consequently all federal courts) the power to overturn presidential actions or laws passed by Congress if they are unconstitutional. The judiciary's status as an independent and equal branch of government was solidified by this ruling.

Checks and Balances: By strengthening the system of checks and balances, it made sure that no one branch of government grew too strong. One of the most important checks on the legislative and executive branches is the judiciary.

Constitutional Supremacy: This rule also confirmed that all other laws must abide by the Constitution, which is the highest law of the land.

In essence, Marbury v. Madison changed the Supreme Court's role from one of a minor player to one of a powerful arbiter of the Constitution, a role it still plays today.

Innumerable subsequent historic rulings that have influenced American culture, ranging from environmental preservation to civil rights, were also influenced by this ruling.

The distribution of power in American politics would be substantially different in the absence of Marbury v. Madison. The fact that a case that appeared to be about a single unfulfilled commission could have such a significant and long-lasting effect on the rule of law is evidence of Chief Justice Marshall's vision.

References

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).

National Archives, Marbury v. Madison, National Archives (July 28, 2025), https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/marbury-v-madison.

By: Arjan Bir Sodhi Masters in Law in Dispute Resolution, Pepperdine University

For: Lex Republica